{"title":"Justifying economic coercion: the discourse of victimhood in China’s unilateral sanctions policy","authors":"Enrico V. Gloria","doi":"10.1080/09512748.2021.1980605","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract China remains reluctant in claiming unilateral economic sanctions as a valid form of statecraft. China has consistently withheld official acknowledgment of its use of unilateral sanctions despite using them in different disputes. This has resulted to observations arguing that China is increasingly approaching the use of sanctions in a stealthier, therefore, more aggressive manner. It begs to ask, how does China’s reluctant attitude towards its use of unilateral economic sanctions fit into China’s overall foreign policy logic? More specifically, how does China’s victimhood discourse justify unilateral sanctions and at the same time, promote a positive identity of itself in light of coercion? This paper argues that China’s consistent vague acknowledgment and denial in claiming a direct hand on unilateral sanctions comes from its broad foreign policy objective of maintaining a positive identity through its discourse of victimhood. To uncover this understanding, this paper analyzes China’s official positions in six bilateral disputes where China has resorted to unilateral sanctions. While existing observations only stop at ‘plausible deniability’ as primary explanation for China’s vague rhetoric, analyzing China’s predication strategies provides a necessary nuancing in terms of how this peculiar behavior remains consistent with China’s overall foreign policy logic.","PeriodicalId":51541,"journal":{"name":"Pacific Review","volume":"36 1","pages":"521 - 551"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2021-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pacific Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2021.1980605","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"AREA STUDIES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4
Abstract
Abstract China remains reluctant in claiming unilateral economic sanctions as a valid form of statecraft. China has consistently withheld official acknowledgment of its use of unilateral sanctions despite using them in different disputes. This has resulted to observations arguing that China is increasingly approaching the use of sanctions in a stealthier, therefore, more aggressive manner. It begs to ask, how does China’s reluctant attitude towards its use of unilateral economic sanctions fit into China’s overall foreign policy logic? More specifically, how does China’s victimhood discourse justify unilateral sanctions and at the same time, promote a positive identity of itself in light of coercion? This paper argues that China’s consistent vague acknowledgment and denial in claiming a direct hand on unilateral sanctions comes from its broad foreign policy objective of maintaining a positive identity through its discourse of victimhood. To uncover this understanding, this paper analyzes China’s official positions in six bilateral disputes where China has resorted to unilateral sanctions. While existing observations only stop at ‘plausible deniability’ as primary explanation for China’s vague rhetoric, analyzing China’s predication strategies provides a necessary nuancing in terms of how this peculiar behavior remains consistent with China’s overall foreign policy logic.
期刊介绍:
The Pacific Review provides a major platform for the study of the domestic policy making and international interaction of the countries of the Pacific Basin. Its primary focus is on politics and international relations in the broadest definitions of the terms, allowing for contributions on domestic and foreign politics, economic change and interactions, business and industrial policies, military strategy and cultural issues. The Pacific Review aims to be global in perspective, and while it carries many papers on domestic issues, seeks to explore the linkages between national, regional and global levels of analyses.