Individual Submission Summary
Share...

Direct link:

Download

Norms, Language, and Power: An English School Analysis of Xi Jinping’s China

Thu, September 5, 2:00 to 3:30pm, Loews Philadelphia Hotel, Adams

Abstract

This paper examines the rise of a resurgent nationalist narrative in Xi Jinping’s China through the lens of the English School and Neoclassical Realism. This theory-testing case study works to build upon the logic of both paradigms by expanding upon the distinction between the English School’s International System and International Society and by exploring the crucial connection between norms and power. The paper first examines the language used in contemporary China surrounding the state’s current ambitions in East Asia and the world and how this language is being used as a tool for normative power projection. The paper explores two key examples of this language: 1) The rhetoric the state uses to support two leading international Chinese projects: the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), and 2) The normative framework touted by the so-called Chinese School of International Relations Theory. Secondly, the paper examines several key elements of China’s contemporary geopolitical outcomes in East Asia and the world, focusing on the practical impacts of both the BRI and the AIIB. The paper then analyzes these elements through the lens of Buzan’s English School typologies of International Society. By juxtaposing the geopolitical realities of these elements with the language used by Xi’s government both at home and abroad, the paper argues that China has not formed a true cooperative international society with the West, and instead, its language operates as normative power projection within the International System. This is the primary contribution of this paper. Combining elements of Neoclassical Realism with the English School archetypes, it shows how language and norms can exist within the International System layer of the English School and how this language is distinct from cooperative frameworks in the International Society.

Author