Publication – Chinese Paper

“Lying in international politics and the recent developments in Middle East and North Africa”, The Global Studies Journal, vol.1, April 2011 / 「國際政治中的謊言與近期的中東及北非局勢」，《國際關係研究》，第一期，2011年4月

Abstract (in Chinese):
近期中東及北非爆發的連串人民抗爭，不單令區內的執政者人人自危，國際社會亦深表關注。自突尼斯的「茉莉花革命」起，阿爾及利亞、約旦、阿曼、也門、沙特阿拉伯及敘利亞都有人民上街遊行和示威。當中最震撼的要算是埃及總統穆巴拉克被迫下台，巴林則血腥鎮壓民眾。執筆之際，美英法三國正空襲利比亞的政府軍以保護反對派在班加西的陣地，似乎區內局勢短期內都難以喘定。相信現時美國最關注的是，未來的埃及政府能否繼續擔任美國在區內的重要盟友，巴林的情況會否影響到美軍的第五艦隊基地。鄰近利比亞的歐洲國家如意大利，亦擔心當地的動亂會進一步加劇偷渡潮。其他重要問題如石油價格何時可趨於穩定？打擊當地恐怖分子的力量及進度是否受到影響？以及伊朗會否藉著今次的中東變局而成為得益者？可見，今次中東及北非的革命是牽一髮而動全身。

Publication – Book Chapter

“Two key stumbling blocks for Hong Kong’s democratization: Personal vote and Beijing’s policies” in Liang Fook Lye and Wilhelm Hofmeister (editors), Political Parties, Party Systems, and Democratization in East Asia, World Scientific Publishing, Mar 2011

Abstract:
Hong Kong has a high standard of socio-economic development with an effective government system and a solid foundation of rule of law. However, the democratization process in Hong Kong remains dull. This paper suggests that there are two key stumbling blocks for Hong Kong’s democratization. First, many political parties in Hong Kong have been focusing on providing constituency services in order to build up personal relations with voters, often resulting in votes for the candidate rather than for the party. This phenomenon not only undermines the proper role of the Legislative Council (Legco), but also the process of democratization. Second, Beijing’s economic, institutional and cultural policies have offered Hong Kong people a great materialistic support, especially during the economic downturns. By easing the general discontent among Hong Kong people and creating a stable and harmonious political climate, Beijing plays an important role in diluting the demand for democratization in Hong Kong.

Publication – Chinese Paper

“Sino-Japanese relations after the incident of Diaoyu Island”, Leaders, vol.37, January 2011 / 「釣魚台事件後的中日關係」，《領導者》，第三十七期，2011年1月

Abstract (in Chinese):
釣魚台事件無可否認是導致中日關係惡化的近因，但只是中日關係的其中一環，是一個導火線而已。觀乎中日在未發生釣魚台事件之前，雙方已頻於釣魚台海域、東海油田、整體軍力發展及戰略部署方面交手。特別是日本新執政的民主黨口中雖說要發展自主外交，與美國保持距離，及加強與中國及其他亞洲國家的外交關係，但日方的國防計劃與之前自民黨的執政時期實在沒有什麼分別，中國依然被日本視為最大威脅，日本政府亦一早預料到將會與中國在釣魚台或東海一帶發生衝突。釣魚台事件後的中日關係，還需從中日整體的戰略層面分析。以下是一些近年中日雙方在東北亞區內的部份衝突及部署，可見中日關係的主軸仍然是政冷經熱，雙方表面上隨著2009年中新上台執政的日本民主黨而有所改善，實質仍是互相防範。釣魚台事件只是早一步顯示出雙方的根本分歧。

Conference Paper

“An analysis of the discrepancy of Chinese non-intervention policy towards Sudan”, The 3rd International Forum for Contemporary Chinese Studies – China’s Development in the Post-Crisis Period, 17-19 Sep 2010, Xian, China

Abstract:
The norm of non-interference has long been an important principle of Chinese foreign policy since the 1950s as it is part of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. While many scholars notice that China is integrating with the current international order, the Chinese foreign policy seems to be more constructive in dealing with international crisis such as those humanitarian missions carried out by the United Nations. Paradoxically, in the meantime, China holds firmly on its non-intervention policy and has prevented any international intervention which targets Myanmar, North Korea and Sudan’s Darfur.

By studying the case of Sudan, this paper finds that China has indeed intervened in the internal affairs of Sudan, though the means and level of the Chinese interventions are different from the traditional western economic sanctions and military interference. The discrepancy of Chinese non-intervention policy – the gap between its principle and practice suggests that there is a clash of interest between its normative principle and other pragmatic national interests. While China enjoys a rapid growth of overall national capability, its unformed foreign policy probably undermines China’s great power status.

This paper first evaluates the Chinese leverage towards Sudan in economic and political fields. Second, this paper argues that China has mixed interests in dealing with Sudan. On the one hand, China needs to prevent international intervention in Sudan for its normative and traditional principle of non-interference as well as its energy interests in Sudan. On the other hand, China has to intervene in the internal affairs of Sudan – the Darfur issue for the tremendous international pressure right before the opening of 2008 Beijing Olympic in order to preserve China’s international image as a responsible power. Third, this paper lists out some empirical cases that China has attempted to shape or change the situation in Sudan’s Darfur. Lastly, this paper discusses the implications of the discrepant Chinese non-intervention policy in the context of China-Africa relations.

Publication – Book Chapter

“Discrepancies, political discourses, and implications of China’s multidimensional diplomacy”, in Simon Shen and Jean-Marc Blanchard (editors), Multidimensional Diplomacy of Contemporary China, Rowman & Littlefield’s Lexington Books, May 2010

Abstract:
Discrepant Chinese foreign policies can be found in the following dimensions: China’s non-intervention policy; China’s attitudes towards various territorial negotiations; the Chinese leaders’ responses on regional and international crisis; and the blueprint of Chinese military development. The interpretations of the contradiction between Chinese principles and practices are twofold. First, China has to strike a balance between its moralistic principles and national interests. This is to say, some pragmatic national interests such as regime security, regional or border stability, economic and technological interdependence as well as the access of blue water capability are more important than the moralistic principles. Second, China must present its image as a responsible and peaceful rising power in order to assure its neighbouring countries and other great powers that China will not be a threat to them in the future. But the contrasting outcome of the Chinese practice may not be able to convince others. Thus, the rationale behind the Chinese foreign policy seems to be more complicated than many analysts expected. And definitely the discrepant Chinese foreign policies have significant implications about our understanding of China’s newly emerged multidimensional diplomacy.

Conference Paper

“The discrepancy of Chinese non-intervention policy – the case of North Korea”, The 3rd Annual China Postgraduate Network Conference, 8-9 April 2010, Oxford, The United Kingdom

Abstract:
The norm of non-interference has long been an important principle of Chinese foreign policy since the 1950s as it is part of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. While many scholars notice that China is integrating with the current international order, the Chinese foreign policy seems to be more constructive in dealing with international crisis such as those humanitarian missions carried out by the United Nations. Paradoxically, in the meantime, China holds firmly on its non-intervention policy and has prevented any international intervention which targets Myanmar, North Korea and Sudan’s Darfur.

By studying the case of North Korea, this paper finds that China has indeed intervened in the affairs of North Korea, though the means and level of the Chinese interventions are different from the traditional western economic sanctions and military interference. The discrepancy of Chinese non-intervention policy – the gap between its principle and practice suggests that there is a clash of interest between its normative principle and other pragmatic national interests. While China enjoys a rapid growth of overall national capability, its unformed foreign policy probably undermines China’s great power status.

This paper first summarizes the recent development of China-North Korea relations. Second, this paper argues that China has mixed interests in dealing with North Korea. On the one hand, China needs to prevent international intervention in North Korea for its normative principle and geo-strategic consideration. On the other hand, China has to intervene in the affairs of North Korea for various pragmatic national interest as well as non-traditional security concerns. Third, this paper lists out some empirical cases that China has attempted to shape or change the situation in North Korea, a classical example is the nuclear issue. Lastly, this paper discusses the implications of the discrepant Chinese non-intervention policy towards the regional order.

Publication – Journal Paper

“China’s advancements in Central Asia: Limitations towards a regional power” (with Zhengxu Wang), East Asian Policy, vol.1, no.4, 2009

Abstract:
As a main founder of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, China’s trading activities and energy investments in Central Asia have increased since the 1990s. Many analysts expect Chinese influences to increase in the region. This paper looks at the Chinese influence in trade, energy development, diplomacy and soft power, and finds that China can hardly be regarded as a dominant power in the region. China should further develop its public diplomacy in order to foster ties with Central Asian countries.

Publication – Monograph

China, India and Russia – Cooperation and Construction of the Asia-Pacific Order in the 21st Century, LAP Lambert Academic Publishing, October 2009

Abstract:
This study examines the interactions between China, India and Russia as they are the major powers to construct the Asia-Pacific order in the 21st century. It studies the three countries’ divergent and convergent interests in order to uncover their concerns and incentives. It further identifies the Asia-Pacific order that China, India and Russia want to build, as well as the measures they have taken to alter the existing Asia-Pacific order. Three constraining forces form the key guiding regularities of the Asia-Pacific order. First, regional institutions such as Association of Southeast Asian Nations, Shanghai Cooperation Organization and the Six-Party Talks constrain the influence of China, India, Russia and the United States. Second, China, India and Russia jointly or independently constrain American hegemony in pursuing non-interventionist norms and challenging the norms of nuclear non-proliferation. Third, Indian and Russian hedging policies not only weaken the American hegemonic influence, but also limit China’s rising influence.

Publication – Journal Paper

“Re-interpreting China’s non-intervention policy towards Myanmar: Leverage, interests and intervention”, (with Yongnian Zheng), Journal of Contemporary China, vol.18, iss.61, 2009

Abstract:
China’s non-intervention policy has long been criticized for prolonging the rule of many authoritarian regimes. Myanmar has become one of the classic examples. As China is expected to become a responsible great power, her behavioral patterns have aroused many concerns. This paper aims to re-interpret China’s non-intervention policy. While explaining various constraints on China’s capability to intervene in the Myanmar government, it shows how China is making efforts to seek a new intervention policy in dealing with countries like Myanmar. It argues that China’s insistence on a non-intervention policy does not mean that China does not want to influence other countries such as Myanmar. To assess Chinese leverage and its non-intervention policy toward Myanmar as well as to supplement the current limited academic discussion on Sino-Myanmar relations, in this paper we first examine Chinese leverage in Myanmar through Burmese local politics, such as the power struggle between the central government and local rebel governments. Second, we disaggregate the Chinese interests in Myanmar into different levels (regional, geo-strategic and international) and discuss how these interests affect China’s non-intervention policy. Third, we argue that China has indeed tried to intervene in Myanmar politics, but in a softer manner that contrasts with the traditional Western hard interventions, such as economic sanctions and military interference.

Conference Paper

“Two key stumbling blocks for Hong Kong’s democratization: Personal vote and Beijing’s policies”, International Conference on Political Parties, Party Systems and Democratization in East Asia, jointly organized by Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung & East Asian Institute, 13 August 2009, Singapore

Abstract:
Hong Kong has a high standard of socio-economic development with an effective government system and a solid foundation of rule of law. However, the democratization process in Hong Kong remains dull. This paper suggests that there are two key stumbling blocks for Hong Kong’s democratization. First, many political parties in Hong Kong have been focusing on providing constituency services in order to build up personal relations with voters, often resulting in votes for the candidate rather than for the party. This phenomenon not only undermines the proper role of the Legislative Council, but also the process of democratization. Second, Beijing’s economic, institutional and cultural policies have offered Hong Kong people a great materialistic support, especially during the economic downturns. By easing the general discontent among Hong Kong people and creating a stable and harmonious political climate, Beijing plays an important role in diluting the demand for democratization in Hong Kong.

For more information: http://www.nus.edu.sg/NUSinfo/EAI/august.pdf