Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jn8rn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-24T17:48:14.706Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Transcending rationalism and constructivism: Chinese leaders’ operational codes, socialization processes, and multilateralism after the Cold War

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 November 2014

Kai He  and
Huiyun Feng
Kai He*
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark
Huiyun Feng
Affiliation:
Associate Professor, Department of Political Science, Utah State University, Logan, USA
*
*E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This paper challenges both rationalist and constructivist approaches in explaining China’s foreign policy behavior toward multilateral institutions after the Cold War. Borrowing insights from socialization theory and operational code analysis, this paper suggests a ‘superficial socialization’ argument to explain China’s pro-multilateralist diplomacy after the Cold War. Using operational code analysis to examine belief changes across three generations of Chinese leadership and on different occasions, we argue that China’s pro-multilateralist behavior is a product of ‘superficial socialization’, in which Chinese foreign policy elites change their beliefs about the outside world and regarding the future realization of their political goals in multilateral institutions. However, Chinese policy makers have not changed their instrumental beliefs regarding strategies even in multilateral institutions. China is indeed socialized through multilateral institutions, but its scope is still far from the ‘fundamental socialization’ stage when states’ interests, preferences, and even identities change.

Keywords

Chinasocializationoperational codemultilateral Institutions
Type
Research Article
Information
European Political Science Review , Volume 7 , Issue 3 , August 2015 , pp. 401 - 426
Copyright
© European Consortium for Political Research 2014 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Acharya, A. (2004), ‘How ideas spread: whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism’, International Organization 58(2): 239–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Checkel, J. (2005), ‘International institutions and socialization in Europe: introduction and framework’, International Organization 59(4: The special issue on International Socialization in Europe): 801–826.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, T. (1996), ‘Chinese realpolitik’, Foreign Affairs 75(5): 37–52.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, T. (2006), ‘Fostering stability or creating a monster: the rise of China and U.S. policy toward East Asia’, International Security 31(1): 81–126.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Christensen, T. (2011), ‘The advantages of an assertive China: responding to Beijing’s abrasive diplomacy’, Foreign Affairs 90(2): 54–67.Google Scholar
Epstein, C. (2012), ‘Stop telling us how to behave: socialization or infantilization’, International Studies Perspectives 13: 135–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Feng, H. (2005), ‘The operational code of Mao Zedong: defensive or offensive realist?’, Security Studies 14(4): 637–662.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Finnemore, M. and Sikkink, K. (1998), ‘International norm dynamics and political change’, International Organization 52(4): 887–917.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Flockhart, T. (2006), ‘“Complex socialization”: a framework for the study of state socialization’, European Journal of International Relations 12(1): 89–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, A. (1969), ‘The operational code: a neglected approach to the study of political leaders and decision making’, International Studies Quarterly 13(2): 190–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
George, A. (1979), ‘The causal nexus between cognitive beliefs and decision making behavior’, in L. Falkowski (ed.), Psychological Models in International Politics, Boulder: Westview Press, pp. 95–124.Google Scholar
Goldstein, A. (2003), ‘An emerging China’s emerging grand strategy: a neo-Bismarkian turn?’, in G.J. Ikenberry and M. Mastanduno (eds), International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 57–106.Google Scholar
Goldstein, A. (2005), Rising to the Challenge: China’s Grand Strategy and International Security, Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, M. (2010), ‘Has the Obama administration been tough enough with China?’, Retrieved 26 April 2011 from http://shadow.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/09/27/has_the_obama_administration_been_tough_enough_with_china Google Scholar
He, K. (2009), Institutional Balancing in the Asia Pacific: Economic Interdependence and China’s Rise, New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Holsti, O. (1977), ‘The “operational code” as an approach to the analysis of belief systems’. Final Report to the National Science Foundation, Grant No. SOC 75-14368, Durham: Duke University.Google Scholar
Jakobson, L. and Knox, D. (2010), New Foreign Policy Actors in China, SIPRI Policy Paper No. 26, Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.Google Scholar
Johnston, A.I. (2003), ‘Socialization in international institutions: the ASEAN way and international relations theory’, in G.J. Ikenberry and M. Mastanduno (eds), International Relations Theory and the Asia-Pacific, New York: Columbia University Press, pp. 105–162.Google Scholar
Johnston, A.I. (2005), ‘Conclusions and extensions: toward mid-range theorizing and beyond Europe’, International Organization 59(4): 1013–1044.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Johnston, A.I. (2008), Social States: China in International Institutions, 1980–2000, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Johnston, A.I. and Evans, P. (1999), ‘China’s engagement with multilateral security institutions’, in A.I. Johnston and R. Ross (eds), Engaging China, London: Routledge, pp. 241–278.Google Scholar
Kent, A. (2007), Beyond Compliance: China, International Organizations, and Global Security, Stanford: Stanford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lanteigne, M. (2005), China and International Institutions: Alternative Paths to Global Power, London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Leites, N. (1951), The Operational Code of the Politburo, New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Leites, N. (1953), A Study of Bolshevism, New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Levy, J. (1994), ‘Learning and foreign policy: sweeping a conceptual minefield’, International Organization 48(2): 279–312.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Li, X. (2010), ‘Social rewards and socialization effects: an alternative explanation for the motivation behind China’s participation in international institutions’, Chinese Journal of International Politics 3(3): 347–377.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lin, G. (2004), ‘Leadership transition, intra-party democracy, and institution building in China’, Asian Survey 44(2): 255–275.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lu, N. (1997), The Dynamics of Foreign-Policy Decisionmaking in China, Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
Malici, A. (2008), When Leaders Learn and When They Don’t: Mikhail Gorbachev and Kim Il Sung at the End of the Cold War, New York: SUNY.Google Scholar
Malici, A. and Malici, J. (2005), ‘The operational codes of Fidel Castro and Kim Il Sung: the last cold warriors?’, Political Psychology 26(3): 387–412.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nye, J. Jr (2010), ‘China seems to have made wrong call on its relations with US’. Retrieved 26 April 2011 from http://thescotsman.scotsman.com/opinion/Joseph-Nye-China-seems-to.6157294.jp Google Scholar
Olson, S. and Prestowitz, C. (2011), The Evolving Role of China in International Institutions, Report for The U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission Washington, DC: The Economic Strategy Institute.Google Scholar
Pu, X. (2012), ‘Socialization as a two-way process: emerging powers and the diffusion of international norms’, The Chinese Journal of International Politics 5: 341–367.Google Scholar
Roy, D. (1994), ‘Hegemon on the horizon? China’s threat to East Asian security’, International Security 19(1): 149–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, M. (2000), ‘Issues in assessing psychological characteristics at a distance’, Political Psychology 21(3): 511–528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, M. and Walker, S. (2006a), ‘Democratic leaders and the democratic peace: the operational codes of Tony Blair and Bill Clinton’, International Studies Quarterly 50(3): 561–583.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, M. and Walker, S. (eds) (2006b), Beliefs and Leadership in World Politics: Methods and Applications of Operational Code Analysis, New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schafer, M. and Walker, S. (2006c), ‘Operational code analysis at a distance: the verbs in context system of content analysis’, in M. Schafer and S. Walker (eds), Beliefs and Leadership in World Politics: Methods and Applications of Operational Code Analysis, New York: Palgrave.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schimmelfennig, F. (2000), ‘International socialization in the new Europe: rational action in an international environment’, European Journal of International Relations 6(1): 109–139.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schimmelfennig, F. (2005), ‘Strategic calculation and international socialization: membership incentives, party constellations, and sustained compliance in central and Eastern Europe’, International Organization 59(4): 827–860.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schweller, R.L. and Pu, X. (2011), ‘After unipolarity: China’s visions of international order in an era of U.S. decline’, International Security 36(1): 41–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shambaugh, D. (2013), China Goes Global: The Partial Power, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Snyder, R.C., Bruck, H.W. and Sapin, B. (1954), Foreign Policy Decision-Making as an Approach to the Study of International Politics, Foreign Policy Analysis Project Series, No. 3, Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Steinbrunner, J. (1974), The Cybernetic Theory of Decision, Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutter, R. (2005a), ‘China’s regional strategy and why it may not be good for America’, in D. Shambaugh (ed.), Power Shift: China and Asia’s New Dynamics, Berkeley: University of California Press, pp. 293–299.Google Scholar
Sutter, R. (2005b), China’s Rise in Asia: Promises and Perils, New York: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.Google Scholar
Swaine, M. (2010), ‘Perceptions of an assertive China’, China Leadership Monitor 32: 1–18.Google Scholar
Swaine, M. (2011), ‘China’s assertive behavior: on “core interests”’, China Leadership Monitor 34: 1–25.Google Scholar
Terhalle, M. (2011), ‘Reciprocal socialization: rising powers and the West’, International Studies Perspectives 12(4): 341–361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thies, C.G. (2010a), ‘Role theory and foreign policy’, in R. Denemark (ed.), The International Studies Encyclopedia, Oxford: Blackwell, pp. 6335–6356.Google Scholar
Thies, C.G. (2010b), ‘State socialization and structural realism’, Security Studies 19: 689–717.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thies, C.G. (2012), ‘International socialization processes vs. Israeli national role conceptions: can role theory integrate IR theory and foreign policy analysis?’, Foreign Policy Analysis 8: 25–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thies, C.G. (2013), The United States, Israel, and the Search for International Order: Socializing States, London/New York: Routledge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vertzberger, Y. (1990), The World in Their Minds: Information Processing, Cognition, and Perception in Foreign Policy Decisionmaking, Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
Walker, S. (1977), ‘The interface between beliefs and behavior: Henry Kissinger’s operational code and the Vietnam War’, Journal of Conflict Resolution 21(1): 129–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, S. (1983), ‘The motivational foundations of political belief systems’, International Studies Quarterly 27(2): 179–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, S. (ed.) (1987), Role Theory and Foreign Policy Analysis, Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Walker, S. (1992), ‘Symbolic interactionism and international politics: role theory’s contribution to international organization’, in M. Cottam and C.-Y. Shih (eds), Contending Dramas: A Cognitive Approach to International Organizations, New York: Praeger, pp. 19–38.Google Scholar
Walker, S., Schafer, M. and Young, M. (1998), ‘Systematic procedures for operational code analysis: measuring and modeling Jimmy Carter’s operational code’, International Studies Quarterly 42(1): 175–189.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Walker, S., Schafer, M. and Young, M.(2003), ‘Profiling the operational codes of political leaders’, in J. Post (ed.), The Psychological Assessment of Political Leaders: History and Methods, Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, pp. 241–245.Google Scholar
Walker, S., Schafer, M. and Marfleet, G. (2011), ‘The British strategy of appeasement: why Britain persisted in the face of negative feedback’, in C.F. Hermann (ed.), When Things Go Wrong: Foreign Policy Decision Making under Adverse Feedback, London/New York: Routledge, pp. 111–141.Google Scholar
Walker, S.G., Malici, A. and Schafer, M. (eds), (2011), Rethinking Foreign Policy Analysis: States, Leaders, and the Microfoundations of Behavioral International Relations, London/New York: Routeldge.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J. (2004), ‘China’s multilateral diplomacy in the new millennium’, in Y. Deng and F.-L. Wang (eds), China Rising: Power and Motivation in Chinese Foreign Relations, New York: Rowman & Littlefield, pp. 159–199.Google Scholar
Watson, G. and McGaw, D. (1980), Statistical Inquiry, New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Wendt, A. (1999), Social Theory of International Politics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, J.-D. (2000), Asia-Pacific Security: China’s Conditional Multilateralism and Great Power Entente, Carlisle: Strategic Studies Institute.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zhao, S. (2010), ‘Adaptation and strategic calculation: China’s participation in international regimes and institutions’, in P.K.-H. Yu, E.W. Chow and S.S.F. Kao (eds), International Governance, Regimes, and Globalization: Case Studies from Beijing and Taipei, Lanham: Lexington, pp. 69–93.Google Scholar
Zurn, M. and Checkel, J. (2005), ‘Getting socialized to build bridges: constructivism and rationalism, Europe and the nation-state’, International Organization 59(4): 1045–1079.CrossRefGoogle Scholar