The Legacy of Communism and IR in East Asia in the 2010s

Abstract

As we consider how history matters for ongoing international relations in East Asia, we should not overlook the impact of Communism in China, Russia, and North Korea. These three countries each claimed to be a distinct model of Communism in the 1960s–1980s. With Xi Jinping showcasing the “China Dream,” Vladimir Putin trumpeting “Eurasianism” as a way to revive a sphere of influence and civiliza-tional uniqueness, and Kim Jong-un in full pursuit of a dynastic mandate, some may not notice the Communist identity elements in their respective endeavors. In this chapter, I analyze the national identity inherited from traditional and even reform Communism and, following the precedent of my recent book, argue that a Communist Great Power National Identity Syndrome that has so far evolved through Transition 1 (CGP T1 NIS) is in evidence.1 I focus on how the syndrome impacts foreign relations today, taking note of Sinocentrism and Eurasianism with brief mention of North Korea. In this approach, I differ from the realist strain of IR theory, which has denied the importance of national identities, as well as the liberal strain preoccupied with building trust through economic integration as well as multilateral institutions, rather than confronting identity gaps directly. Although the constructivist approach includes within its broad scope perceptions and identities, it cuts too wide a swath, including often pressing for democratization, rather than honing in unwaveringly on gaps in worldviews that drive countries toward greater distrust, mutual accusations, and rejection of pragmatic diplomacy.