Suchergebnisse

The United States and China are arguably the most globally consequential actors of the early twenty first century, and look set to remain so into the foreseeable future. This volume seeks to highlight that American images of China are responsible for constructing certain truths and realities about that country and its people. It also introduces the understanding that these images have always been inextricable from the enactment and justification of US China policies in Washington, and that those policies themselves are active in the production and reproduction of imagery and in the protection

"Demonstrating how past American images of China are vital to understanding the nature and significance of those which circulate today, this volume seeks to highlight that American images of China are responsible for constructing certain truths and realities about that country and its people and introduces the understanding that these images have always been inextricable from the enactment and justification of US China policies in Washington"--

This article reintegrates the frontier into debates about contemporary global affairs. Its analytical focus is the United States, because despite widespread agreement that it constitutes a "frontier nation," we lack clear explanations of what the American frontier is today and what role(s) it occupies in US politics and foreign policy. To resolve this, the article ontologically reconceptualizes the frontier, arguing that it first constitutes a narrative, rather than a spatial, construct. Instead of conquering a once self-evident frontier, the United States has a long-standing tradition of narrative "frontiering" as the ideational (re)production of frontiers. The frontier has been most consistently understood not in terms of territory but ideas, with Washington's modern-day "frontiers of freedom"—notably in the Asia Pacific—as real and consequential as those of the past. The frontier-as-narrative represents a performative act about what the United States is and how it should engage at peripheral borderlands of its identity. Beyond the United States, frontiers are created and actioned anew to reshape international affairs.

AbstractSince 2016, the UK government has outlined plans for 'Global Britain' as a framework for post‐Brexit foreign policy. Some criticise the idea as a vision of 'Empire 2.0', but it is rarely made clear exactly what form it takes or what its wider political implications are. This article argues that Global Britain constitutes not just an idea or a slogan, but a foreign policy narrative and, more specifically, the narrative of empire. Indeed, to appear reasonable its grand ambitions require pre‐existing knowledges of past imperial 'successes' and accepting images of empire among the British public. Yet Global Britain lacks efficacy: as a domestic rather than an international narrative, by being inherently regressive in its worldview, and for contradicting the preferences of international partners on which the UK heavily relies. These narrative flaws, it is argued, make Global Britain an actively problematic, rather than merely ineffective, component of UK foreign policy.

AbstractChina's increasing capabilities are a central focus of modern day US security concerns. The International Relations literature is a key forum for analyses of the so-called 'China threat' and yet it remains relatively quiet on the role of ideas in the construction and perpetuation of the dangers that country is understood to present. This article reveals that throughout history 'threats' from China towards the United States, rather than objectively verifiable phenomena, have always been social constructions of American design and thus more than calculations of material forces. Specifically, it argues that powerful and pervasive American representations of China have been repeatedly and purposefully responsible for creating a threatening identity. It also demonstrates that these representations have enabled and justified US China policies which themselves have reaffirmed the identities of both China and the United States, protecting the latter when seemingly threatened by the former. Three case studies from across the full duration of Sino-American relations expose the centrality of ideas to historical and contemporary understandings of China 'threats', and to the American foreign policies formulated in response.

China's increasing capabilities are a central focus of modern day US security concerns. The International Relations literature is a key forum for analyses of the so-called 'China threat' and yet it remains relatively quiet on the role of ideas in the construction and perpetuation of the dangers that country is understood to present. This article reveals that throughout history 'threats' from China towards the United States, rather than objectively verifiable phenomena, have always been social constructions of American design and thus more than calculations of material forces. Specifically, it argues that powerful and pervasive American representations of China have been repeatedly and purposefully responsible for creating a threatening identity. It also demonstrates that these representations have enabled and justified US China policies which themselves have reaffirmed the identities of both China and the United States, protecting the latter when seemingly threatened by the former. Three case studies from across the full duration of Sino-American relations expose the centrality of ideas to historical and contemporary understandings of China 'threats', and to the American foreign policies formulated in response. Copyright © 2013, British International Studies Association.

China has been a major power for far longer than is typically acknowledged in the West. This paper seeks to redress established discourse of China as a 'rising' power which now enjoys common usage within Western policy‐making, academic and popular circles, particularly within the United States; China can more accurately be conceived of as a 'recovering power'. A tendency by successive Washington administrations to view the world in realist terms has forced the label of 'rising' power onto China along with the negative connotations that inevitably follow. We should acknowledge the folly in utilising a theoretical approach largely devoid of any appreciation for the social and human dimensions of international relations as well as the importance of social discourse in the field. Finally, policy‐makers in Washington must reconsider their realist stance and, with a fuller appreciation of world history, recognise that American hegemony was always destined to be short‐lived.