Chapter 1 Introduction
1.5. Research Method
1.5.2. Historical Comparative Research
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
order to analyze and research on relative literature of China and Central Asian states relationships, this study seeks to provide relevant evidence from different resources available in the libraries and on the Internet, namely, journal articles, news articles and published books related to Central Asia affairs, especially taking the U.S. War College publications as the basis of geo-political calculations. In addition, journals from the Republic of China (ROC) Army publishers are also included as an important reference of Taiwanese perspective in terms of China’s strategic calculations after September 11, 2001. Of course, much of the materials are focused on comparisons among China, Russia, and the United States competitions and cooperation in Central Asia.
1.5.2. Historical Comparative Research
We can observe and analyze a certain period of time or event, and compare the causes and effects comparative research: before and after an event, which means we use an event as main idea of a research. In this article, I would discuss the regional security of Central Asia and to discuss the cause and effects of September 11 Event in terms of China, Central Asia, and the United States, finally to analyze and compare the interactions between China and the Central Asian states.
Besides, in an attempt to analyze the questions about how China faces the situation after September 11, 2001 and the following U.S. presence in Central Asia, the thesis needs to apply in-depth studies of critical literature and a comparative and an analytical case study to guide and support the construction of hypotheses. Because this study is a non-experimental research, the qualitative method is adopted in order to support the construction of hypotheses. The method involves literature readings and the results are descriptive rather than predictive. In other words, this study aims to
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
analyze the rising Chinese influence in Central Asia, and how the United States and Russia maintain their hegemonies over this region. From the perspectives of realism and structuralism theories, there will be an analysis of how China reacts to the U.S.
presence in Central Asian region, especially after September 11, 2001.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
Chapter 2
Theoretical Overview
Before we get to understand China’s interests toward Central Asia, we have to know what China’s national strategy is. According to David Jablonsky, national strategy involves all elements of national power. Those elements can be horizontally broken down into four categories: political, economic, psychological, and military.26 Furthermore, national strategy is based on national interests with specific national goals, and then we will know national policy under the guidelines of national strategy concept. The following paragraphs will help to clarify the definitions among theories applied in this study. There are four elements consist of the concern in this study:
classical realism, neo-realism, neo-liberalism and their relation with security concepts.
2.1. Classical Realism
According to Ole R. Holsti, classical realism is the most venerable and persisting theory of international relations, it provides a starting point and baseline for comparison with competing models. While “power” plays an important role in classical realism, the correlation between relative power balances and political outcomes is often less than compelling, suggesting the need to enrich analyses with other variables where three assumptions are derived as follows: (1) state is the center
26 David Jablonsky, J.Boone Bartholomees, Jr. ed., “Theory of War and Strategy,” U.S. War College Guide to National Security Policy and Strategy (Carlisle Barracks, PA.: Strategic Studies Institute, U.S.
Army War College, June 2008), pp. 8-9.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
of nation state behavior. The research of international affairs takes nation state as a
“unit,” other units like individual, group, and international organizations are the secondary units;27 (2) there are practical options. The interactions between nations in the international system are considered on the basis of national interest; therefore one nation will carefully assess the costs from various options, in order to gain the maximum interests; and (3) power is capability. The system basically relies on self-help by the individual states because the world is anarchy. The more power one has, the more the state is able to achieve its goals and objectives; the less power one has, the more that state may be subject to the whip of other states.28
The classical realism scholar, Hans Morgenthau argues that human natural is the key explanation of nation-state behavior. In his view, human natural is fixed and unchangeable, and it is inherently focused on the quest for even more power.
Consequently, conflict among people competing for power is inevitable. Since states are simply aggressions of individual humans and statesmen are the leaders of those groups, nation-state will exhibit this same lust for power in their behavior with one another. No matter what one does, this lust for power anchored in human natural will lead to some inevitable conflicts.29
From the basic theories of classical realism discussed above, we can understand that classical realism is expanded from the perspective of “altruism,” and tends to view the world based on conditions of competitions, conflicts, and anarchy status in the international system. As a result, the research of international relations will focus
27 Hans J. Morginthau, Politics among Nations: Struggle for Power and Peace (New York Knopf, 1978), p. 8.; Kenneth Waltz, Theory of International Politics (Mass.: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, 1979), p 94.; Stephen Krasner, Structural Conflict (Berkley: University of California Press, 1985), p. 28.
28 Hans J. Morginthau, p. 25.
29 Hans J. Morginthau, p. 25.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
on power and interest as the core elements, the concepts of “altruism” and “moral”
will make state suffer from big loses.
However, the main characteristics of structural realism are assumed identical to realism, admitting the international situation is anarchy, and the international relations are in state centric status. It also puts emphasis on order, restriction, and cooperation in the international system, focusing on the function of economy in the international relations. Kenneth Waltz's Theory of International Politics, published in 1979, has for the first time put forward the theory of “structural” theory and later became the original theory of structural realism. Waltz's structural realism is using the framework of international system and power distribution, including nation-state, power, and interest from classical realism, as the basis of analyzing the external behaviors of nation-state. Although structural realism respects the power, it also values power as a tool by which to reach the goal of national security. As a result, there produces two essentials in the international system, one is unity and the other is the system itself.30
2.2. The Development of Waltz's Structural Realism
Waltz’s theory of structural realism is likely to serve to raise consciousness about the importance of the systematic context within which international relations take place. Accordingly, how structural realism defines the international system will be analyzed from four dimensions.
The first dimension is system structure theory. Waltz thinks there are two
30 Robert Keohane, “Reflections on Theory of International Politics: A Response to My Critics,”
Neo-realism and its Critics (New York: Columbia University Press, 1986), pp. 322-345.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
variables in the system, one is structure, and the other is unit.31 In the structure of the international system, the behavioral body of many nation states uses their own
“power” to determine the order in the system. However, in the international system, the structure is consisted of each unit; formally speaking, every nation state has its power of sovereignty and is equal to each other, and there is also no need to obey the arrangements of other states. The international system is anarchic and decentralized, but in the anarchy international system, the structure is defined by the capabilities among units, the distribution of capabilities is a form of power distribution, which indirectly leads to the variation of system structure according to the variation of power distribution. In brief, the power distribution determines the structure of international system, and the order of each unit makes up structure, the change of order will lead to variation of structure.32 In fact, the variable determines the international structure is power distribution in the international system, and different power distribution will produce different international structure, however, different international structure and state will determine the external behaviors of states.
Second, there are three key elements that construct system structure: (1) the international system is anarchic rather than hierarchical; (2) the international system is composed of sovereign units, each unit is formally equal and therefore the functions that they perform are also similar; and (3) the distribution of capabilities is among units in the international system. Waltz thinks that the former two elements are constant, but the third one is in a changing state, because the functions of units are similar as long as the system remains anarchic. Therefore the structure of the international system is not in static status but dynamitic, the structure can change the
31 Kenneth Waltz, p. 79.
32 Kenneth Waltz, p. 80.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
behavior of units, therefore change the result of interactions among units in the international system.
Third, the biggest difference between classical realism and structure realism is the definition of power and security.33 Classical realism regards pursuing power between states as the purpose of each member in the international system.
Morgenthau even proposes power is equal to interests, and power is equal to purpose.34 On the other hand, Waltz thinks that the final goal of state is to acquire security by power which is only one method of gaining security. Waltz proposes new power concept different from classical realism, also he gives it new function and concept. He regards the structure is formed according to power extent in system which changes the structure. Furthermore, the variation of power and power distribution among states will help both structure forming and the variation of structure.35
Finally, Waltz thinks balance of power theory is one of the important components of structural realism while power is only a method rather than the purpose. It is not the purpose of nation state to seek for maximum power, rather, it seeks the equally power distribution. If we scrutinize the true meaning is to the equally power distribution among big states. He even thinks the distribution of power under a bipolar system will lead to the equilibrium and stabilization of the international system.36
2.3. The Value of Waltz's Structural Realism
33 Kenneth Waltz, pp. 112-121.
34 Kenneth Waltz, p. 8.
35 Kenneth Waltz, pp. 123-128.
36 Kenneth Waltz, pp. 161-170.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
The biggest difference between classical realism and structural realism is first, classical realism is to scrutinize the operation of international powers from the point of state and human nature without discussing the levels within the system. Second, classical realism does not discuss issue of power distribution in the international system, but it focuses on the operation of power equilibrium in the international society. However, Scholar Stanley Hoffmann points to three main distinctions between classical realism and Waltz's structural realism. First, classical realism focuses on nation state level, stressing that the world is anarchic, however structural realism focuses on system level, thinking that the international relation is interdependent on the interactions of international politics and economy. Second, classical realism focuses on the research of national interest and power, but structural realism puts emphasis on the distribution of power among states, advocating the analysis of structure. Third, classical realism emphasizes the possibilities of national conflict instead of the possibility of international cooperation, and ignores the cooperation of international institutions; structural realism, on the contrary, advocates the combination of international conflict and international cooperation, putting emphasis on the possibility of international cooperation, and paying attention to the function of cooperation facilitated by international mechanism.37
Waltz's structural realism has been the leading model which provides a useful framework for understanding the collapse of the post-World War I international order, the World War II, and the Cold War. It is also applied by international scholars who study international relations.
37 Stanley Hoffmann, Primacy or World Order-American Foreign Policy since the Cold War (Montreal:
McGraw-Hall Book Company, 1980), p. 188.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2.4. The International Relations Theory and Security Concept
Peace and security have been the core issues in the international relation studies.
From the West point of view, three perspectives shall be discussed in order to understand international security theory, they are as the follows: (1) there is analysis of security theory in the study of International Relations; (2) the issue of security will not disappear; on the contrary, it becomes more and more important in the future; and (3) security policy should be established on the basis of theoretical analysis in the long run.
In other words, the issue about peace and security has been a critical issue in the international relation theory. The international relation theory has been evolved from classical realism to many types which also intrigue the evolvement of “security concepts.” Therefore, by looking into the variations of the security concepts within the frame of the development of international relation theory, it is helpful to know the causes of the evolvement of security concept and the thesis of different security concept, which provides a wider view for us to further discuss security theory after the end of Cold War.38
Realism and Traditional Security Concept
“Security” is the primary condition of survival and development in human society, and is one of the main issues in the international relation theory. Further, it
38 倪世雄，「冷戰後國際關係理論的新發展」，當代國際觀係理論 (台北：五南出版社，2003
年 ) ， 頁 564 。 [Ni Shixiong, Lengzhanhou Guojiguanxi De Xinfazhan (The Post Cold War International Relation Theory and Development), DangDai Guojiguanxi Lilun (International Relation Theory) (Taipei: Wunan Publisher, 2003), p. 564.]
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
also represents national security in the international relation studies. On the other hand, classical realism argues that all nations pursue power, and the national interests are defined by power which is the guarantee of acquiring national interest. However, realism presumes that anarchy is the feature in the international system, the international system is a self-help system because anarchy, and self-help will necessarily lead to power politics resulting in military competition, balance of power, and global wars. In other words, the military power is the main element that affects national security. The traditional national security is military security, a zero-sum game, which means one country's security is the insecurity of the others. As a result, the other country's security is another country's insecurity.39
Neo-Realism and Its Security Concept
Kenneth Waltz developed theory of neo-realism (defined as structural realism) on the basis of realism theory, shifting human nature from self-interest to the international structure formed by state to state interactions. The biggest difference between neo-realism and classical realism is that classical realism defines power as a goal followed by nations; however, neo-realism uses power as a tool in international relations. For example, all states possess some level of military power, and each state has the option of threatening or using the power. To some extent, each state must be concerned with the power capabilities of other states. Therefore, what concerns the states is security instead of power. To neo-realists, the characteristic of the international politics is not necessary be endless conflicts and wars, rather, there exists
39倪世雄，「冷戰後國際關係理論的新發展」，當代國際觀係理論 (台北：五南出版社，2003
年 ) ， 頁 564 。 [Ni Shixiong, Lengzhanhou Guojiguanxi De Xinfazhan (The Post Cold War International Relation Theory and Development), DangDai Guojiguanxi Lilun (International Relation Theory) (Taipei: Wunan Publisher, 2003), p. 564.]
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
limited cooperation among all nations.
What really concerns the neo-realist is the issue of relative gain. From the perspective of neo-realist, what worries neo-realists is the distrust among nations during the process of cooperation. As a result, both realism and neo-realism hold the speculation that it is not only lack of trust, but also full of misunderstandings in the international system.
Neo-Liberalism and Independence with Neo-Realism
Both neo-realism and neo-liberalism share some assumptions, particularly on the perspective of the security concept. Neo-liberalism pointed out the function of Institution among nation behaviors in the anarchy international system, and the absolute gain of security cooperation within the system. Not only does neo-liberalism assure the existence of mutual interest, but also the share of group interest in the long term. Robert O. Keohane and Joseph Nye are neo-liberalism scholars who argue that realism ignores the fact of international cooperation in the international system, explaining that realism not only ignores the function of institution but also the development of institutionalized society in the international system. Specifically, the extent of interdependence among politics and economics, mutual conflicts, mutual competitions, and regional cooperation are constantly increasing, contributing huge efforts to the international system.40 In addition, the domestic affairs are internationalized, making it harder for classical realism to meet the requirement of international cooperation.
40 Robert O. Keohane, Joseph S. Nye, Power and Interdependence (New York: Addison-Wesley Publishing, 2000), p. 12.
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
To sum up, the biggest difference between neo-realism and neo-liberalism is that the former precludes the possibilities of cooperation between states based on the distrustful relations of states, resulting the norm of zero-sum game; however the latter ensures the existence of cooperation based on the marginal costs and benefits, and under this circumstances, non-zero-sum game is normalized, therefore the international security can be gained by nations in the international system.
2.5. New Security Concept and Structural Realism
Why does China put forward New Security Concept? (NSC) From the end of last century, China combines both of its foreign and security policy in response to the rapid growth of comprehensive national power. China's NSC puts emphasis on economy, technology, society, culture, and environment protection which become the core of this idea. The new security concept especially focuses on the importance of economic security while China also thinks that all countries have to cooperate with each other in order to reach the goal of mutual prosperity. Furthermore, under the framework of NSC each and every country should strive for “mutual interests” which means on the basis of one country's national interests and economic security, there will be more and more mutual interests through the process of combining two countries' interests in the international society.41 Meanwhile, it is the main consideration of security cooperation, maintaining the regional stabilization, and global prosperity and peace. As a result, the NSC holds a position of enhancing
41 黃財官，「中共『新安全觀』戰略研析與作為」，陸軍學術雙月刊 491 (桃園： 2007)：46。
[Huang Caiguan, Zhonggong “Xinanquanguan” Zhanlveyanxi Yu Zuowei (The Strategic Analysis of China’s New Security Concept), Lujun Xueshushuangyuekan (Army Bimonthly) 491 (Taoyuan: 2007):
46.]
‧ 國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
regional cooperation with the other countries without against the third party, under the
regional cooperation with the other countries without against the third party, under the