Chinese Policy Institute: Analysis - Academics writing on China

[Tianjin42]

Hi all,

 

Just to flag a project I've been involved with here - whilst reading a PhD at University of Nottingham I have done some part-time work for the university's China Policy Institute. The is basically a forum for China academics but one part - 'CPI: Analysis', is a platform where a number of leading China academics from around he world publish on topical issues. The idea is to bridge the gap between academia and those with an interest in China - it's a university project rather than anything commercial, and posts are around 1000 words only. Typically there is a weekly theme and a post will go out each day. This week, for example, is China and the environment - including posts on water pollution, smog, environmental activism, and a post on climate change by an academic who has just performed some interesting research on the Loess Plateau.

 

Recently we put out commentary on the NGO law, South China Sea, and Sino-British relations. 

 

Home page is: https://cpianalysis.org/ You can follow if interested. 

[Luxi]

Lots of interesting articles there, thank for the reference. The site is very nicely put together.

 

[abcdefg]

Excellent! Thanks for this calling this high quality resource to our attention.

[Angelina]

Could you try doing this kind of writing in Chinese? 

[Tianjin42]

On 3/15/2017 at 0:35 PM, Angelina said:

Could you try doing this kind of writing in Chinese? 

 

It'd certainly be useful practice for Chinese learners such as us but I think the audience is a wide range of those with interests in China who might not have the language skills. Also from personal experience (and a number of Chinese academics I'm in contact with) some of the more potentially contentious academic dialogues primarily play out in English language arenas (discussing the legitimacy the Conservative Party or the British role in the Irish Potato Famine in a frank and robust manner wouldn't usually be a problem in British journals but similar discussions with Chinese examples don't appear to have the same level of acceptance in mainstream Chinese academic discourse). 

[Angelina]

10 hours ago, Tianjin42 said:

Also from personal experience (and a number of Chinese academics I'm in contact with) some of the more potentially contentious academic dialogues primarily play out in English language arenas (discussing the legitimacy the Conservative Party or the British role in the Irish Potato Famine in a frank and robust manner wouldn't usually be a problem in British journals but similar discussions with Chinese examples don't appear to have the same level of acceptance in mainstream Chinese academic discourse). 

 

 

 

We can always change that. 

[艾墨本]

@Angelina Censorship is much more lax about what can be seen in English. As soon as the conversation is happening in Chinese, stricter rules tend to be at play. The process of changing that puts at risk your ability to come to China. A professor at my school tried to change that. His visa applications are no longer accepted.

[Angelina]

26 minutes ago, 艾墨本 said:

The process of changing that puts at risk your ability to come to China. A professor at my school tried to change that. His visa applications are no longer accepted.

 

 

Challenge accepted. 

[Tianjin42]

Hey,

 

I won't post in the thread too often but just wanted to mention that today's post is a particularly interesting one: Michael Reilly - 30 years in Asia with the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office, writing on "Confucianism, Morality and Chinese Diplomacy".

 

[Angelina]

Robin Cook should have learned at least a little bit of ethics, any ethics. Bad person. Ruined my childhood. 

 

 

 

Excellent post. 

[Matthewkell]

Good article. However, as it is an article about Confucianism in Chinese diplomacy, I would like to add something about 仁爱 - to what extent does this Confucian concept influence Chinese foreign policy behaviour? China holds an extremely rigid "realist" view of IR, viewing the world primarily as a competition between state actors, and holds a strong belief in each state minding its own business. Within this, I think I can perceive a Confucian view of everyone playing their role in the Five Relationships - that is, the Chinese state has no responsibility to anyone but China and the Chinese people, what happens in other countries is outside of China's field of responsibility so long as it does not effect China's interests. For example, most Chinese do not understand why a European might be angry about Trump's election despite Trump not posing any direct threat to his own countries interests. 

The "west"'s soft power depends in large part on promoting values that have, at least potentially, a cross-cultural, universal application. (所谓的“普世价值”) The foreign policy alternative China seems to be proposing is a "business only, no questions asked" style of non-interference in other countries affairs. With the Philippines this approach seems to have won it some success, as Duterte seems to prefer a China which does not make noise about extrajudicial killings to the US - however, I'm not sure this is a sufficiently compelling moral vision that can inspire people around the world to become "pro-Chinese," and seems like it could potentially backfire if there was a backlash against Duterte in future and his opponents took power in the Philippines.

 

From the article:
 

Quote

Or an example that directly affected China was the way it was badly wrong-footed by the sudden shift in policy in Myanmar in late 2011 that led to the latter re-engaging with the west, a shift driven in part by China’s own policy of economic engagement with no questions asked, which ultimately fuelled suspicion in Yangon that China was acting solely in its own interests.

 

Does anyone have some reading material or further information on this particular event?

[Angelina]

 

Speaking from experience, their power depends on bombing civilians just because we happen to be born in the wrong country. No amount of soft power branding + blogging can change that. 

Quote

The "west"'s soft power depends in large part on promoting values that have, at least potentially, a cross-cultural, universal application. (所谓的“普世价值”) T

[Matthewkell]

5 minutes ago, Angelina said:

 

 

Speaking from experience, their power depends on bombing civilians just because we happen to be born in the wrong country. No amount of soft power branding + blogging can change that. 

 

Not denying that "the west"'s power ultimately stems from violence, but it has an ideological soft power component that makes a practical difference too. e.g. Someone from Estonia or Ukraine may be better disposed towards NATO and the EU than they are towards Russia because of what they perceive their values to be, at least relative to those of Russia.

[Angelina]

Well, my family left Greece after our village was occupied by Nazis, and this occupation happened with NATO's and British help. Not to mention how they fought back, but napalm... 

Unlike, the Ukraine or Estonia, Jugoslavia was not occupied by the USSR (you can't play the "lesser" evil card here), BUT Robin Cook decided to make an ethical turn later.

 

The question is not if the UK took an ethical turn with New Labour, it must mean that what was done previously was somehow unethical. The question is, if the clearly unethical things Robin Cook did were ethical by his standards, how bad was it before? 

 

 

[Matthewkell]

Well, I'm not actually in disagreement with you. I'm not about to be cheerleading for or defending any "humanitarian interventions." 

I'm curious, what role did Robin Cook play in the NATO intervention in former Yugoslavia, exactly? I haven't heard much about this before.

[Angelina]

There is teleological and deontological ethics. Realpolik is teleological ethics. I don't count bodies, but at least one thousand civilians died. Teleological ethics. 

 

Quote

We are very careful in our targeting plans, we select only military targets and we also are very careful when our pilots are over the target zone, if they cannot clearly see the target zone then they abort the mission, rather than run the risk of civilian casualties.
 

 

 

Cook interview

 

Then, the Chinese have done reverse engineering of military technology. How does this fit into Chinese morality? 

[Tianjin42]

Just another heads up as there is another good article that has gone up today - Buddhism and Basketball:

https://cpianalysis.org/2017/04/11/buddhism-and-basketball-the-dai-monks-of-yunnan/