The Baltic Resilience to China’s “Divide and Rule”

Q2 Social Sciences Lex Portus Pub Date : 2021-05-31 DOI:10.26886/2524-101X.7.2.2021.2
U. Bērziņa-Čerenkova
{"title":"The Baltic Resilience to China’s “Divide and Rule”","authors":"U. Bērziņa-Čerenkova","doi":"10.26886/2524-101X.7.2.2021.2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article examines the interactions of the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania with China in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) format. First, it explores three most widespread criticisms of the Chinese BRI approach, namely: 1. The risk of Beijing becoming legitimating factor for strains on democracy, freedom and the rule of law; 2. Support towards the Chinese interpretation of values and tolerance of censorship; 3. Debt arising from infrastructure loans. Further, the article tries to establish to what extent did the Baltic states remain resilient to them, offering possible explanations to the Baltic cases along three lines – systemic resilience, discursive resilience, and financial resilience. The article concludes that BRI is taking different shapes in different regions, and that local political culture along with wider supra-national organizations determines the range and response to BRI, therefore, national institutional frameworks in combination with overwatch from supranational standard-enforcing institutions are the leading factors of countries’ resilience to risks stemming from BRI. Methodologically, the article employs qualitative approaches to data, including discourse analysis, document analysis and historic analysis. The primary sources include documents, agreements and statements of officials from China, the Baltic states, Italy, and the EU, as well as secondary sources including research publications, media reports, and mutually comparable national data.","PeriodicalId":36374,"journal":{"name":"Lex Portus","volume":"7 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Lex Portus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26886/2524-101X.7.2.2021.2","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

The article examines the interactions of the Baltic states of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania with China in the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) format. First, it explores three most widespread criticisms of the Chinese BRI approach, namely: 1. The risk of Beijing becoming legitimating factor for strains on democracy, freedom and the rule of law; 2. Support towards the Chinese interpretation of values and tolerance of censorship; 3. Debt arising from infrastructure loans. Further, the article tries to establish to what extent did the Baltic states remain resilient to them, offering possible explanations to the Baltic cases along three lines – systemic resilience, discursive resilience, and financial resilience. The article concludes that BRI is taking different shapes in different regions, and that local political culture along with wider supra-national organizations determines the range and response to BRI, therefore, national institutional frameworks in combination with overwatch from supranational standard-enforcing institutions are the leading factors of countries’ resilience to risks stemming from BRI. Methodologically, the article employs qualitative approaches to data, including discourse analysis, document analysis and historic analysis. The primary sources include documents, agreements and statements of officials from China, the Baltic states, Italy, and the EU, as well as secondary sources including research publications, media reports, and mutually comparable national data.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
波罗的海对中国“分而治之”的抵御能力
本文考察了波罗的海国家爱沙尼亚、拉脱维亚和立陶宛在“一带一路”倡议倡议中与中国的互动。首先,它探讨了对中国“一带一路”倡议最普遍的三种批评,即:1。北京成为民主、自由和法治压力合法化因素的风险;2.支持中国人对价值观的理解和对审查制度的宽容;3.基础设施贷款产生的债务。此外,文章试图确定波罗的海国家在多大程度上对它们保持了弹性,并从三个方面对波罗的海案例提供了可能的解释——系统弹性、话语弹性和金融弹性。文章得出结论,“一带一路”倡议在不同地区呈现出不同的形式,地方政治文化和更广泛的超国家组织决定了“一带一步”倡议的范围和响应,因此,国家制度框架与超国家标准执行机构的监督相结合,是各国抵御“一带一路”倡议风险的主要因素。在方法论上,本文采用了定性的方法来处理数据,包括话语分析、文献分析和历史分析。主要来源包括中国、波罗的海国家、意大利和欧盟官员的文件、协议和声明,以及次要来源,包括研究出版物、媒体报道和相互可比的国家数据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Lex Portus
Lex Portus Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
16
审稿时长
6 weeks
期刊最新文献
Parallel Imports: Striking a Delicate Balance in a Multifaceted Environment Potential Influence of Article 6(1)(b) of the Hague Principles on Choice of Law in International Commercial Contracts on Indian Private International Law Ukrainian Supreme Court Judicial Practice in Cases Arising from Disputes between Foreign Shipowners or Protection and Indemnity Clubs, and Seafarers or Seafarers’ Next of Kin India’s Submission to the ITLOS Climate Change Advisory Opinion: A Lost Opportunity Ukraine – China Asymmetric Economic Power Relations: What is to Come after BRI?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1