Search

UNESCO's relatively high prestige across East Asia has spurred intensifying efforts by governments to use its imprimatur to legitimate official narratives of the past and visions of the future. This article focuses on China's use of UNESCO as an arena for competitive national 'branding' in the education field, especially relating to STEM and AI. We analyse the Chinese state's engagement with UNESCO's education work in the context of shifts in budgetary and political influence within the organisation, and of a growing 'securitisation' of education within China itself. We show how Chinese engagement with UNESCO's educational agenda reflects both domestic political considerations and the 'major country diplomacy' of Xi Jinping, as manifested in the 'Belt and Road Initiative' and intensifying strategic competition with the USA. We conclude by discussing the implications of rising Chinese influence within the organisation for UNESCO's capacity for articulating a coherent and consistently humanistic vision for education.

A unit on China's ethnicities provides students rich opportunities to explore multiple themes in the social studies while helping them to develop a deeper understanding of recent events in western China. Studying China's ethnic minorities encompasses such topics as stereotyping, cultural diversity, the creation of ethnic identities, and key historical and geographic concepts. The rise to dominance of Han Chinese culture within East Asia, the nature of Han/non-Han relations, the emergence of nation-states and nationalism, and the development of ethnic and political identities are major threads in world history. Finally, a study of the modern period presents students with opportunities to examine questions of power, authority, governance, human and civil rights, and international relations. Regardless of which thematic vehicle students use, they should be able to demonstrate an understanding of these key points: (1) Definitions of diversity vary among cultures and change over time; (2) Ethnic identities are not immutable; they result from a variety of forces--self, group, other groups and the state--and are negotiated or evolve over time; (3) The development of the majority Han Chinese identity and its relationship with minority groups has a complex history; (4) The emergence of nationalism is a relatively new development in world history; (5) The roots of the current issues in Tibet and Xinjiang go back to the expansion of the Qing Empire, the emergence of European-style nationalism, and the conflict between "empire" and "nation-state" that began with European expansion; (6) The designation, "nationalities" ("minzu") in China is the result of influence from Soviet social science; and (7) Modern concepts of civil and human rights are understood differently in different settings, both by those engaged in struggles for them and by those accused of repressing them. Helping students to develop a deeper, more nuanced understanding of the events in western China is not the only reason for spending class time investigating minorities in China. Through a rigorous examination of the Chinese case, students also develop a better understanding of the complexities of ethnic and political identities, questions of sovereignty, and civil and human rights globally, while they develop and hone their skills in critical analysis, persuasion, reading, writing, and action. (Contains 5 notes and 7 online resources.)

China's rise has been accompanied by a rise in nationalism. But what are the characteristics of this nationalism now being witnessed? Does it support China's constructive engagement with the international order, or does it seek to assert China's supremacy? These questions lie at the hub of a rapidly expanding secondary literature on the emergence of nationalism in China and its impact on China's foreign relations. What is, however, absent from the academic discourse is the voice of the Chinese people themselves. What are their perceptions of the nation-state, and how do these beliefs shape their views of China's relationship with East Asia? To address this gap, we conducted a series of large-scale surveys in Beijing between 2011 and 2013 on the twinned topics of domestic nationalism and international relations. Our findings, as reported below, represent an initial attempt to answer this final and, arguably, most critical set of questions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent years have witnessed the emergence of a more assertive China. What happened to China's “peaceful rise” and “charm offensive”? What explains the changes in China's foreign policy? According to interviews with Beijing and Shanghai-based analysts, China's assertiveness between 2008 and 2010 can be divided into two waves, each triggered by a different cause. The first wave seems triggered by a sense in Beijing that Washington, DC was more differential to China's interests, and less committed to East Asia. The second wave seems best explained as China's response to what it perceived as a far more assertive and threatening United States. Both waves were amplified by two domestic challenges: Chinese leaders’ hypersensitivity to popular nationalism and poor bureaucratic coordination among an expanding number of foreign policy actors. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rise of China has led some commentators to claim that Asia will dominate the twenty-first century. In this article the author argues that, to the extent that countries in the region define and understand their politics in Western terms, the rise of Asia will simply continue the influence of modernity that had its origins in the West. In order to demonstrate this case, the author examines the character of political legitimacy in the region, which is founded on the concept of the state, an idea derived from the West. The modern state form has provided considerable advantages to countries in the region, bestowing international legitimacy on those that claim sovereignty, endowing smaller nations with increased political power in international negotiations, and allowing states to use the idea of non-intervention to shield themselves from international scrutiny. But the concept of the state has also defined new territorial boundaries superimposed on pre-existing political, ethnic and traditional sources of power, thereby creating new problems of legitimacy. In confronting and negotiating these challenges, Asian states have resorted to Western concepts of legitimacy, including democracy, nationalism and performance. Thus, an examination of the politics of legitimacy in Asia reveals the extent to which countries in the region are fundamentally shaped in their architecture of governance and their conception of legitimacy by Western ideas. The success of Asia in the twenty-first century will therefore not introduce a new type of ‘Asian’ global politics, or restore a more ancient kind, but simply confirm the dominance of modernity in shaping thought and practice. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Typologies are widely used in the field of intercultural communication to explain cultural differences. Especially the typology ‘individualism versus collectivism’ (I/C) is a central theoretical construct in cross-cultural comparison. But are such typologies really suited for explaining cultural phenomena? Is their explanatory power limited because the theoretical underpinnings are based on a Western mindset? And is using typologies as scientific models appropriate to explain intercultural incidents and uncover cultural patterns from a non-Western view as well? Do such typologies meet the demands of a modern view on the field of intercultural communication? This article casts a critical light on the appropriateness and applicability of typologies. The aim is twofold. The first part examines the limitations of typologies from an East Asian standpoint, bringing out the hidden cultural mindset on which this bipolar construct is built. The second part presents a model meant to contribute to a more profound debate between East Asian and Western views on intercultural communication. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Chinese writings on international relations increasingly invoke history. In the past Chinese and foreigners alike have seen China's foreign policies through the lens of history, but recent Chinese stress on the 'harmonious world' resulting from Confucianism has shifted the discussion. It serves as a guide to resurgent claims for leadership, a source of legitimation for why China deserves leadership, and a warning of how its leadership may be abused to the detriment of countries agreeing to regionalism or multilateralism. Claims to superiority raise tensions in Japan, South Korea, and elsewhere where hopes had existed for a shared view of history. They arouse controversy among advocates of socialist ideology who fear that Confucianism will eclipse communism. The increasingly hereditary elite of Party leaders continues to bridge the gap between these two types of memory, but they face an ideological challenge at home and a credibility challenge abroad. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Chinese maritime assertiveness since 2008 is a product of China's growing economic and military power combined with a centrally fostered nationalism. Although incidents with several maritime neighbours may not have all been initiated by China, the Chinese over-reacted. Matters were made worse by the opacity of Chinese decision-making processes and by problems of governance as shown by the multiplicity of Chinese authorities in charge of separate naval forces. The American ‘pivot’ to Asia provides neighbours with a hedge against an overbearing China, but they still need to cultivate relations with China on whom they are economically dependent. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

The author analyses the balance of political power in Asia in the 1970s from an Indian perspective and discusses the growing nationalism among the Asian societies. Extrapolation of expenditure in China on military forces from 1967-1968 is estimated to be 6.0 to 6.5 billion Chinese yuan. One study suggests that the size of allocation for the defence effort by China in the 1970s can be between 12 to 18 billion Chinese yuan. India widened its armed forces consequent on the Chinese attack in 1962.

Though China had never been part of Britain's formal empire, a century of trade and warfare had caused China to cede trading and territorial rights to Britain. But from 1925 to 1927 the rise of the Kuomintang and the anti-imperialistic movement began to threaten British interests in China, alarming policy makers in London. At the same time, the China issue also captured the attention of MPs, who spent long sessions debating British policy towards China. These debates reveal much about MPs' perceptions of China, and can be seen as a microcosm of the British public sphere, encapsulating the multivalent British opinions on the world around them. Discussions of the 'China Situation' became an opportunity to express opinions on most of the important topics of the day - the economy, the General Strike, the Red Scare, disarmament, and the future of empire. A close reading of these debates can tell us much, not only about assumptions MPs held about China and the Chinese people, but also about issues closer to home. Three major events in China grabbed the attention of parliament in the period 1925-7. They were: (1) the May 30th Movement and the subsequent anti-British boycott in 1925; (2) the decision to send troops to Shanghai in January 1927; and (3) the so-called Nanking outrages, when British subjects in China were killed by Nationalist Army troops. What follows is a description and analysis of the debates over these three episodes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In this article the author examines the state of international relations between the United States and Asia during 2008. It is noted that despite the fact that the Asia Pacific region underwent significant economic damage as a result of the global financial crisis originating in the United State, relations with the U.S. are not strained. The author notes that this lack of tension in the region is widespread despite concerns that North Korea will develop nuclear weapons and the lack of resolution in difficulties between Taiwan and China.

While the origins of nationalism are sought in global historical trends, few analysts have shown how nations themselves are constituted and re-shaped by circulating global power, ideas and models. The view from East Asia shows that these circulations are mediated by regional developments and interactions which bind these nations together in rivalry and interdependence. The histories of China, Japan and Korea have been closely tied together since the end of the nineteenth century and, with a gap of about thirty years during the Cold War, have intensified once again. The global and regional constitution of nations produces a dialectic between its global form and aspirations and misrecognition of this constitution arising from the self-perception of nationalism as historically immanent. This tension between the global constitution and national misrecognition contributes to the tenacity of nationalism. It also allows us to get a better grasp of the relationship between historical change and structure in nationalism and the relationship between state and popular nationalisms in the countries of the region. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

"Writing Insecurity" puts forward a framework for looking at identity politics in Xinjiang. This framework posits that the PRC's modernization program is in conflict with the interests of the Uighur nationality, rendering insecure both the people of Xinjiang and the state's integrity. The PRC's push to modernize China comprises a blend of material and ideational developments, especially dynamic in the post-Mao era. For Xinjiang's Uighur minority, development has relocated much of the region's resource wealth to urban centers in the east and permitted a massive influx of Han Chinese migration. Furthermore, and despite rising tides of Chinese nationalism, development has not exclusively consolidated Chinese national sentiments. Revitalizing the Silk Road has also re-established cultural ties between Muslim minorities and Central Asian, Turkic, and Middle Eastern centers. Perhaps the most oft cited security-political dynamic of the contemporary era is the concurrent dilution and multiplication of competing cultural loyalties. This article seeks to contribute to a body of literature that criticizes accepted notions of identity and culture, while exploring these as a motivating force in the case of Uighur resistance to China's modernization project. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]