China's Search for Security by Andrew J. Nathan and Andrew Scobell

Abstract

Reviewed by: China's Search for Security by Andrew J. Nathan and Andrew Scobell Hiroki Takeuchi Nathan, Andrew J. and Andrew Scobell. China's Search for Security. New York: Columbia University Press, 2012. xxiii, 406 pp. $32.95 (cloth). Along with China's rise, "China's position in the world has changed" (p. xi) and the importance of understanding Chinese foreign policy has increased. This new book by Andrew Nathan and Andrew Scobell, which comprehensively discusses almost all aspects of Chinese foreign policymaking by taking China's domestic politics into consideration, is one of the best guides to contemplate the implications of China's rise. It follows The Great Wall and the Empty Fortress, written by Andrew J. Nathan and Robert S. Ross (Norton, 1997), and reflects the change of China's position in world politics since then. As China is now one of the most powerful states in the world, Chinese foreign policy has become more complicated and analyzing it has become more challenging. However, Nathan and Scobell argue that two things have remained unchanged: first, we should look at Chinese policymakers' point of view to analyze Chinese foreign policy; and second, China will not be a threat for the West unless the West weakens itself. Nathan and Scobell analyze Chinese foreign policy based on the idea of securing "four rings": i.e., the First Ring includes the entire Chinese territory (including Taiwan, from the PRC's point of view); the Second Ring, China's adjacent countries (including the countries that do not share land borders with China, such as Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines); the Third Ring, six regional systems (overlapping the Second Ring: Northeast Asia, Oceania, continental Southeast Asia, maritime Southeast Asia, South Asia, and Central Asia); and the Fourth Ring, the world beyond the Third Ring (Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and North and South America). From China's perspective, the United States is involved in all four rings. To analyze China's security concerns, Nathan and Scobell argue, realism is the most useful theoretical tool among international relations theories, as it "suggests foreign policy is driven by national self-interest—in turn meaning strategic and economic advantage, or what we call 'security'" (p. xv). They do not think that liberalism is a useful tool, because "most foreign policy issues in China are managed by a small elite with little interference from other political institutions and social forces" (p. xvi). However, changes in China's position in the world mainly come from its involvement in global markets. According to the authors, economic interdependence is a very important factor in explaining Chinese foreign policy for the last three decades and common interests, according to liberal theories, would decrease conflict among states and weaken the role of military power and the insecurity it breeds. It is for this reason that, in the rest of this review, I choose to explore the book's findings and arguments from the realist and liberal perspectives. Realism, Nathan and Scobell argue, could explain Chinese foreign policy during the Cold War. The Sino-Soviet alliance in the 1950s and its split since the end of the 1950s could be explained by "China's responding efforts to preserve its autonomy" (p. 66), and in the 1970s, "China's new tie with the U.S. became an effective deterrent to Soviet attack on China" (p. 81). However, China's relationship with the United States has assumed a new dimension beyond simply seeking security since the 1980s when Deng Xiaoping started the post-Mao economic reform and China gradually became an important actor in the global market. Now economic interdependence between China and the U.S. has reached the level where "to be free of dependence on the other for its own security … is a distant goal of either side, unless the other side withdraws from the race" (p. 113). China's relationship with Japan is similar to its relationship with the United States, in the sense that deepened economic interdependence has produced common interests, but it has been different because of the contentious history between the two states. As a result, although "the two countries have built trade and investment...