China-Russia Relations After The Cold War

3y ago
36 Views
2 Downloads
2.30 MB
320 Pages
Last View : 1d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Randy Pettway
Transcription

THE LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS AND POLITICAL SCIENCEBjoern Alexander DuebenChina-Russia Relations after the Cold War:The Process of Institution-Building and ItsImpact on the Evolution of Bilateral CooperationA thesis submitted to the Department of International Relations of the LondonSchool of Economics and Political Science for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy,London, October 20131

DeclarationI certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of theLondon School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than whereI have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any workcarried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it).The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, providedthat full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without my priorwritten consent.I warrant that this authorisation does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of anythird party.I declare that my thesis consists of 107156 words.AbstractAfter three decades of seemingly insurmountable suspicion and bilateral crises, the postCold War period has witnessed a remarkable renewal and strengthening of Sino-Russianrelations. Many of the underlying factors and circumstances contributing to the bilateralrapprochement of the past two decades remain yet to be analysed. This thesis illuminates therole of one of the factors involved in this process: the development of institutional linksbetween the two states. Bilateral institutions, which were almost entirely absent until themid-1990s, have now rapidly proliferated into a dense network of commissions and subcommissions, working groups, and institutionalised exchanges, encompassing virtually allsectors of interaction between China and Russia. In addition, both countries are increasinglyinteracting in the framework of multilateral institutions and international organisations. Thisthesis examines what role the institutionalisation of Sino-Russian relations has played inenabling both states to forge a closer working relationship with each other. It begins byproviding a brief comparative overview of the most common accounts of the factors that ledto increasing Sino-Russian rapprochement in recent decades, assessing these factors throughthe lenses of relevant approaches in International Relations theory. It points out deficits inthese common accounts, concluding that bilateral cooperation remained fraught withsubstantial problems and obstacles in all of these dimensions. Hence, these factors alone didnot provide a policymaking context in which a persistent mutual rapprochement wasparticularly likely, let alone predetermined. The thesis then examines to what extent theprocess of institution-building has contributed to fostering and perpetuating bilateralrapprochement. It employs analytical concepts borrowed from Neoliberal Institutionalisttheory and applies them in the context of several case studies of institution-building betweenChina and Russia. It explores the extent to which the newly-created bilateral institutionalchannels have facilitated the implementation of cooperative policies between both countriesby bringing together relevant stakeholders and rendering each country’s policy towards theother more stable, more predictable, and more well-informed.2

AcknowledgementsFirst and foremost, I would like to thank my parents for their ceaseless support andpatience. I am equally indebted to my supervisors, Prof. Christopher Hughes and DrRoy Allison, for their untiring advice and the intellectual inspiration they provided.Special thanks are also due to Prof. Zhu Feng and Prof. Guo Jie at Peking University,as well as Prof. Nikolai Samoilov and Prof. Vladimir Kolotov at St Petersburg StateUniversity. Beyond this, I am immeasurably grateful to my friends and colleagueswho have given me all kinds of support, academic and otherwise, and who havemade these years worthwhile. Many more deserve to be mentioned than can beincluded here, but those who I’d like to name in particular include Noam Gur, mybrother Peter, his wife Michaela, and all of the following: Magdalena Delgado,Daniel Falkiner, Rebekka Friedman, Borja Guijarro-Usobiaga, Melissa Koluksuz,Philipp Lamprecht, Julia Muravska, Martin Niemetz, Dimitrios Stroikos, NëalSuleimanova, Raj Verma, Inez von Weitershausen, and Shuxiu Zhang, but alsoHeinrich Peter, Thomas Crook, Marcus Rudd, Temirlan Shaikh, and AlexanderVolsky. Much of the foundation for my academic work was laid by a group ofoutstanding scholars, including Dr Peter Dickens and Dr Harald Wydra at theUniversity of Cambridge, as well as the late Dr Émile Perreau-Saussine, who did somuch to kindle and to direct my intellectual curiosity.3

Table of Contents:I: Introduction and Methodology5II: The Historical and Structural Context of Sino-Russian Relations39The Dynamics of Sino-Russian Interaction Up to the Mid-1990s39The Structure of Foreign Policy Decision-Making in China and Russia48III: Conventional Explanations of Bilateral Rapprochement:Geopolitics, Trade, and Mutual Perceptions58Security and Geopolitics58Economic and Energy Relations73Perceptions and Ideas86IV: The Institutionalisation of Sino-Russian Relations104V: Case Study 1 – The Sino-Russian Subcommissionon Trade and Economic Cooperation126Structural Development126Involvement of Senior Officials131Practical and Policy Impact136Mutual Information Exchange and Reassurance152VI: Case Study 2 – The Sino-Russian Energy Dialogue161Structural Development161Involvement of Senior Officials165Practical and Policy Impact171Mutual Information Exchange and Reassurance187VII: Case Study 3 – The China-Russia-India Academic Trilateral202Structural Development204Involvement of Senior Officials209Practical and Policy Impact213Mutual Information Exchange and Reassurance226VIII: Assessment and Conclusion233Structural Development238Involvement of Senior Officials242Practical and Policy Impact249Mutual Information Exchange and : The Development of Sino-Russian Bilateral Institutions3134

Chapter I: Introduction and MethodologyWhoever studies the People’s Republic of China and the Russian Federationconfronts a number of superlatives: China and Russia are, respectively, the world’slargest and ninth-largest countries by population and the largest and fourth-largestcountries by total landmass. They are both major global economic players and amongthe world’s leading military powers. Both command extensive nuclear arms arsenalsand are veto powers on the United Nations Security Council. And both countriesshare one of the world’s longest borders, stretching for more than 4000 kilometres.Extremes have also characterised the course of relations between the twoneighbouring powers: Few bilateral relationships between major states in modernhistory have been characterised by fluctuations as extreme as those that occurredbetween China and Russia. After an initial spell of professed socialist ‘brotherhood’and intense political and economic cooperation in the 1950s, Beijing and Moscowrapidly plunged into a bitter strategic enmity. Persistent mutual hostility andterritorial disputes culminated in an open border war in 1969 and in repeated mutualnuclear threats. It was not until 1989 that bilateral relations were finally normalised.Since the end of the Cold War, events between the newly-founded RussianFederation and a reformist People’s Republic of China have taken a turn in theopposite direction, towards a remarkable renewal and strengthening of Sino-Russianties. After four decades of seemingly insurmountable suspicion and bilateral crises,which more than once threatened to escalate into all-out armed conflict, China andRussia since the late 1990s have forged a close relationship. For both states itrepresents one of the closest relationships with any other great power.While the foundations for Sino-Russian rapprochement were laid in the finalyears of the Soviet Union, notable progress towards close bilateral cooperation hasonly been made since the 1990s. Today, Chinese and Russian officials commonlyassert that relations between their countries are “at their best in history”, 1 andanalysts have called the development of relations with China the “greatest Russian1See e.g. Mu Xuequan, ‘Chinese Premier: China-Russia Relations at Most Important Stage’, Xinhua(2.11.2007), available online at nt 6995010.htm5

foreign policy success of the post-Soviet period.” 2 Having expressed persistentdoubts in the past, outside observers and scholars now commonly acknowledge thesubstantiality and apparent durability of a relationship that had long been regarded aspredominantly symbolic and fragile.While the Sino-Russian relationship has been continuously expanding up to thepresent day, this has happened in spite of the fact that few of the causes of bilateraltension in the past have been conclusively resolved, while China’s dramatic growthin economic and political power has become a source of disquiet for many of itsneighbours, including Russia. The two states have shared interests in developingtheir economic ties and coordinating their security policies, but China’s growingpolitical and economic power has been perceived by many in Russia as a distinctthreat to the country’s national security. At the same time, many policy-makers inBeijing have regarded Russia as an erratic and unpredictable international actor. Itwas therefore not an evident choice for Chinese and Russian policy-makers to haveopted for increasing bilateral cooperation. Academic scholarship has recently begunto devote more attention to the development of Sino-Russian relations, but many ofthe underlying factors and circumstances contributing to the swift bilateralrapprochement of the past two decades remain yet to be analysed.Before the background of continuing uncertainty among analysts as to what theprimary causes of Sino-Russian bilateral rapprochement have been, this thesis aimsto illuminate the role of some of the factors and circumstances involved in thisprocess. Specifically, the role of one such factor is examined through the lens of therelevant approaches in International Relations theory: the development of bilateraland multilateral institutions between both states. Bilateral institutional links, whichhad been almost entirely absent until the mid-1990s, have now rapidly proliferatedinto a dense network of commissions and sub-commissions, working groups, andother institutionalised exchanges, encompassing virtually all sectors of bilateralinteraction and cooperation. The aim of this thesis has been to examine what role theinstitutionalisation of bilateral relations has played in enabling both states to forge aclose relationship with each other. The primary focus of my research into thesedynamics has been the way in and the extent to which institutional channels havepromoted efficiency in the conduct of bilateral policy making, have rendered each2Bobo Lo, ‘The Long Sunset of Strategic Partnership: Russia’s Evolving China Policy’, InternationalAffairs, vol.80, no.2 (March 2004), p.2966

country’s policy towards the other more stable, more predictable, more informed,and less dependent on the acts and whims of individual policy-makers.Accordingly, this thesis formally explores the following principal hypothesis:‘Trans-national institutional structures – forming a gradually developing ‘mechanism’and ‘infrastructure’ of interaction and cooperation between China and Russia – havesubstantially facilitated and stabilised the implementation of cooperative policiesbetween both countries and have provided each government with importantinformation and reassurance about the other’s policies and intentions. As a result,they have altered the nature of cooperation between Beijing and Moscow in a lastingmanner.’On first glance, the proposition that the development of legal-institutionalchannels has significantly promoted Sino-Russian rapprochement may appear to be atruism. However, a common assumption among scholars in the past has been that theinstitutions created between China and Russia – which have never before been thesubject of any specific academic analysis – have been little more than symbolic‘window dressing’. Consequently, this component of the Sino-Russian relationshiphas received minimal scholarly attention in the past. I assume, however, that theswift development of a broad network of bilateral (and, to a lesser extent, multilateral)institutions may have served as an important means for facilitating theimplementation of cooperative bilateral policies and for staying informed andreassured about each other’s strategies and objectives.In terms of its timeframe, this study roughly covers a period of two decades, from1992 to 2012. The start date for my investigations was set by the end of the ColdWar and the collapse of the Soviet Union, since it fundamentally altered the relationsbetween Beijing and Moscow. The core of my investigation is devoted to eventsfrom the mid-1990s onwards, as this is when processes of bilateral institutionbuilding began in earnest (following the creation of the first major bilateralinstitutions and forums of exchange). The investigation ends in 2012, the year whichsaw another round of leadership transitions, both in China and in Russia.The main research question this thesis tries to answer is the following: To whatextent has the extensive and continuously expanding trans-national institutional7

framework constructed between China and Russia since the mid-1990s contributed to:a) rendering bilateral interaction more stable, coherent, predictable, and efficient; andb) enhancing mutual confidence, understanding, and reassurance?Some less central, more specific research questions pursued in this thesis are thefollowing: How much concrete political substance is there to the institutionalchannels that have been created between China and Russia? Are important policydecisions taken within this institutional framework? Are important insights abouteach other’s outlook and intentions gained through their interaction in theseinstitutions? Is the information generated through institutional interaction beingchannelled to the top foreign policy decision makers in Beijing and Moscow?Literature Review:While the development of Sino-Soviet relations received broad attention inacademic circles, relatively little in-depth scholarly work initially existed in Englishon the evolution of Sino-Russian relations after the end of the Cold War. This haschanged since the mid-2000s, and the subject is now again receiving adequatescholarly attention, reflecting its great significance for international politics. For themost part, however, the existing accounts cover only a small number of major,recurring issue areas, which include geopolitics, the oil, gas, and arms trade, the stateof the Russian Far East, as well as bilateral interaction on Central Asia (and,occasionally, North Korea). The analyses rarely go far beyond these ‘stock themes’.A small number of substantive scholarly monographs have been published on thetopic of Sino-Russian relations. The most recent major contribution to the topic is avolume edited by Robert Bedeski and Niklas Swanström that focuses on the energyand security dimensions of the Sino-Russian relationship. 3 Another monographfocusing solely on Sino-Russian energy relations was recently published by KeunWook Paik. 4 This follows a collection of studies edited by James Bellacqua thatprovides a comprehensive, but also primarily descriptive account of the ‘stockthemes’ listed above (with the addition of two studies on Taiwan’s role in the Sino3Robert Bedeski & Niklas Swanström (eds.), Eurasia’s Ascent in Energy and Geopolitics: Rivalry orPartnership for China, Russia, and Central Asia (Abingdon: Routledge, 2012)4Keun-Wook Paik, Sino-Russian Oil and Gas Cooperation: The Reality and Implications (Oxford:Oxford University Press, 2012)8

Russian relationship).5 Another standard work on the topic was published by BoboLo in 2008. 6 While it is comprehensive in scope, Lo’s work focuses particularlystrongly on geopolitical factors and treats many dimensions of Sino-Russiancooperation, such as economic interaction, mutual perceptions and ideational factors,in a more cursory manner.Older academic books on the topic of Sino-Russian relations include a volumeedited by Sherman Garnett and a book by Elizabeth Wishnick, both of which analysemajor bilateral developments up to and during the 1990s, as well as two studies byJeanne Wilson and Akihiro Iwashita that both cover many aspects of the relationshipup to 2003.7 In addition, Natasha Kuhrt published a comparative study of Russia’srelations with China and Japan, which primarily covers the decade of Boris Yeltsin’spresidency in Russia.8 A book by Aleksandr Lukin traced the historical developmentof Russian perceptions of China since the eighteenth century.9The output on the topic of Sino-Russian relations is becoming increasinglyvariegated, which is primarily due to the addition of numerous up-to-date policyreports and studies, published with some regularity by research institutes and thinktanks. One of the most topical and insightful sources on Sino-Russian relations arethe summary reports by Yu Bin, published quarterly by the Center for Strategic andInternational Studies (CSIS).10 However, the above reservations about the coverageof specific ‘stock themes’ particularly apply in the case of policy reports and studies5James Bellacqua (ed.), The Future of China-Russia Relations (Lexington: University Press ofKentucky, 2010)6Bobo Lo, Axis of Convenience: Moscow, Beijing, and the New Geopolitics (Washington, D.C.:Brookings, 2008)7Sherman Garnett (ed.), Rapprochement or Rivalry?: Russia-China Relations in a Changing Asia(Washington, D.C.: Carnegie, 2000); Elizabeth Wishnick, Mending Fences: The Evolution ofMoscow’s China Policy from Brezhnev to Yeltsin (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2001);Jeanne Wilson, Strategic Partners: Russian-Chinese Relations in the Post-Soviet Era (Armonk, NY:M.E. Sharpe, 2004); Akihiro Iwashita, The Sino-Russian ‘Strategic Partnership’: Current Views fromthe Border and Beijing (Sapporo: Hokkaido University, 2003)8Natasha Kuhrt, Russian Policy towards China and Japan: The El'tsin and Putin Periods (Abingdon:Routledge, 2007)9Alexander Lukin, The Bear Watches the Dragon: Russia’s Perceptions of China and the Evolutionof Russian-Chinese Relations since the Eighteenth Century (Armonk, NY: M.E. Sharpe, 2003). Alsoworth mentioning is Andrew Kuchins’ chapter ‘Limits of the Sino-Russian Strategic Partnership’, in:Andrew Kuchins (ed.), Russia After the Fall (Washington, D.C.: Carnegie, 2002). Further importantmonographs on closely related and intersecting topics include Akihiro Iwashita’s very detailed editedvolume Russia and its Eastern Edge, 2 vol. (Sapporo: Slavic Research Center, 2007) and ZhangYunling & Guo Weihong (eds.), China, US, Japan and Russia in a Changing World (Beijing: SocialSciences Documentation Publishing House, 2000). Also of relevance are Gilbert Rozman, KazuhikoTogo & Joseph Ferguson (eds.), Russian Strategic Thought toward Asia (New York: PalgraveMacmillan, 2006) and Judith Thornton & Charles Ziegler, Russia’s Far East: A Region at Risk(Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2002).10Available online at http://csis.org/program/comparative-connections9

(to the extent that many publications consist of little more than near-verbatimreiterations of facts and statements already made before). Recent studies on the topichave covered the standard issue areas in some detail.11 A particular focus of policyreports has been bilateral cooperation in the energy sector. 12 The same basiclimitation that burdens publications by policy institutes

Since the end of the Cold War, events between the newly-founded Russian Federation and a reformist People’s Republic of China have taken a turn in the opposite direction, towards a remarkable renewal and strengthening of Sino-Russian ties. After four decades of seemingly insurmountable suspicion and bilateral crises, which more than once threatened to escalate into all-out armed conflict .

Related Documents:

May 02, 2018 · D. Program Evaluation ͟The organization has provided a description of the framework for how each program will be evaluated. The framework should include all the elements below: ͟The evaluation methods are cost-effective for the organization ͟Quantitative and qualitative data is being collected (at Basics tier, data collection must have begun)

Silat is a combative art of self-defense and survival rooted from Matay archipelago. It was traced at thé early of Langkasuka Kingdom (2nd century CE) till thé reign of Melaka (Malaysia) Sultanate era (13th century). Silat has now evolved to become part of social culture and tradition with thé appearance of a fine physical and spiritual .

On an exceptional basis, Member States may request UNESCO to provide thé candidates with access to thé platform so they can complète thé form by themselves. Thèse requests must be addressed to esd rize unesco. or by 15 A ril 2021 UNESCO will provide thé nomineewith accessto thé platform via their émail address.

̶The leading indicator of employee engagement is based on the quality of the relationship between employee and supervisor Empower your managers! ̶Help them understand the impact on the organization ̶Share important changes, plan options, tasks, and deadlines ̶Provide key messages and talking points ̶Prepare them to answer employee questions

Dr. Sunita Bharatwal** Dr. Pawan Garga*** Abstract Customer satisfaction is derived from thè functionalities and values, a product or Service can provide. The current study aims to segregate thè dimensions of ordine Service quality and gather insights on its impact on web shopping. The trends of purchases have

Chính Văn.- Còn đức Thế tôn thì tuệ giác cực kỳ trong sạch 8: hiện hành bất nhị 9, đạt đến vô tướng 10, đứng vào chỗ đứng của các đức Thế tôn 11, thể hiện tính bình đẳng của các Ngài, đến chỗ không còn chướng ngại 12, giáo pháp không thể khuynh đảo, tâm thức không bị cản trở, cái được

Russia Summit in Sochi the ASEAN-Russia Eminent Persons Group, which included representatives of all ten ASEAN member states and Russia, issued its report titled "ASEAN and Russia: a Future-Oriented Multidimensional Strategic Partnership". Its main recommendation was about upgrading ASEAN-Russia relations to the level of strategic partnership

WEI Yi-min, China XU Ming-gang, China YANG Jian-chang, China ZHAO Chun-jiang, China ZHAO Ming, China Members Associate Executive Editor-in-Chief LU Wen-ru, China Michael T. Clegg, USA BAI You-lu, China BI Yang, China BIAN Xin-min, China CAI Hui-yi, China CAI Xue-peng, China CAI Zu-cong,