Is Russia becoming China’s other? An analysis of China’s foreign policy discourses towards Russia
Date
2017
Authors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Tartu Ülikool
Abstract
Having China’s international identity as the research background, the special position Russia
has in its relations with China created a myth for researchers to tackle. China frequently uses
Othering in its domestic politics in portraying itself as a victim and a tendency of selfvictimization
due to historical sufferings. The reasons for China to see Russia as an Other are
not untraceable with China losing Outer Eastern China to Russian Empire due to unequal
agreement; however, China simply gave up the disputed area in exchange for a solidified
land border and China-Russia relations are ‘at its best’ since the rapprochement. The
partnership did not fall apart as previous scholar works predicted. The Crimean Crisis as a
key event for analysis adds up to the myth that China as a sovereignty hawk was not weary
of Russia’s expansionist foreign policy which led to the annexation of Crimea; instead,
China-Russia relations are brought up to the next level through efforts from both sides. The
current geopolitical approach left this myth unaccounted.
This thesis sets out to shed lights on how China’s identity construction of Russia have
changed from March, 2013 after President Xi Jingping’s incumbent until March, 2017 with
the Crimean Crisis as the key event for comparison. Based on Hansen’s theoretical
framework that foreign policy discourses as the link between identity and foreign policies,
this thesis conducts poststructuralist discourse analysis on Chinese official discourses and
academic debate on Russia using the intertextuality research model 1 and 3B developed by
Hansen (2006). The result has shown before Crimean, both official and academic discourses
did not construct Russia as a radical Other but strongly linked with and supplement to the
construction of China; after Crimean official discourses’ which represent China’s foreign
policy attempts to create new linking to emphasize similarities of the identity construction of
China and Russia upon the emergence of competing discourses in academic debate.
This research focuses primarily on how the identity construction have changed in the
timeframe due to the key event. To unfold the myth, researches on why the identity
construction and Chinese foreign policy have changed this way are encouraged. To present
a more comprehensive overview of discourses, wider text selection including intertextuality
research model 2 and 3A is another angle to tackle.