Login Set as Homepage Contact us

中文 English

Your location:Home > Journals > Center Journals > Abstracts for Volume 4 of Peace and Development in 2017

Abstracts for Volume 4 of Peace and Development in 2017


Taiwan Policy of the Obama Administration

By Tao Wenzhao, Honorary Academician of CASS, Research Fellow of the Institute of American Studies of CASS and Guest Researcher of CPDS. With Ma Ying-jeou, the leader of Kuomintang, coming into office in May of 2008 in Taiwan, cross-Strait relationship underwent a historical turn-about, beginning to travel on a path of positive interaction and peaceful development. Obama remained in office for 8 years, of which 7 and half years coincided with the Ma Ying-jeou regime of Taiwan. Because of the changes of cross-Strait relationship and new developments in the US policy towards China, the Taiwan policy of the Obama Administration was mainly seen as one that adhered to the position of “no unification, no independence and no use of force”, and welcomed the peaceful development of cross-Strait relations conditionally, though its policy was two-sided. Nevertheless, the Taiwan policy of the Obama Administration had long been denounced by both the liberals and the conservatives in the US. Presently, although the US new president Trump has made fundamental changes to the internal and external policies of his predecessor and the leader of Taiwan has been changed, it is still necessary to sum up the Taiwan policy of the Obama Administration to watch out for new uncertainties in the policy of the US towards Taiwan.


The Profoundly Changing World Political Structure

By Ding Yuanhong, Former Chinese Ambassador to European Union; and Guest Researcher of CPDS. The current world political structure was formed after the World War II (WWII). The East and West blocs opposed each other due to their difference in political systems and ideologies; while developed countries in the North were estranged with developing countries in the South due to different historical background and economic development levels. This political structure is short-named as the “East-West & North-South” structure. In the latter half of the century after WWII, as the international situation, especially the power balance among nations, changes, this political structure has been undergoing major and profound changes. The East bloc is on the verge of collapse under the impact of both internal and external factors but it has not disappeared but continued to compete with the West bloc. While the West bloc tries to disintegrate the East bloc, its internal conflict also intensifies which in turn reduces its cohesive power. In the process of changing the situation of “a strong North and a weak South”, the South bloc represented by emerging economies is playing a bigger and bigger role in world affairs. 


How to Evaluate China-US Relations during the Trump Era

By Chen Jimin, Associate Research Fellow from the Institute for International Strategic Studies of the Central Party School of the CPC and Guest Research Fellow of CPDS. Since the beginning of the Trump Administration in January of 2017, under joint efforts of China and the US, especially after the meeting of the two heads of state, the development of China-US relations has entered a new phrase. In the future, the development pattern of China-US relations will be closely related to such factors as Trump’s view on international affairs, the evolution of the current international system, and the interaction between China and the US. Given the characteristics of China-US relations in which sensitivity, complexity and importance are interwoven, the two countries should promote and ensure the orderly development of the bilateral relationship from three aspects, namely the macro positioning, practical promotion and shift in thinking. Predictably, the competition and cooperation in general between China and the US will not undergo fundamental changes, but present the feature of hierarchical distribution: competition will be somewhat upgraded in trade, competition in security can generally be controlled, game-playing over values tends to ease, and cooperation on international agendas will be further explored.


An analysis of the Asia-Pacific Policy of Trump Administration from the Perspective of 16th Asia Security Summit

By Han Xin, Associate Research Fellow with CPDS, China Association for International Friendly Contact. After becoming the American President, Donald Trump initiated a series of “de-Obamanization” policies. The high strategic unpredictability caused widespread concern among American allies as well as the whole world. As the first Trump Administration official to make debut on Asia-Pacific multilateral mechanisms, the US Secretary of Defense James Mattis made a speech on the 16th Asia Security Summit (Shangri-la Dialogue), which attracted extensive attention. In his speech, Mattis, on the one hand, expressed the willingness and expectation to cooperate with China and benefit from it; on the other hand, spoke for his allies through criticizing China’s behaviors, such as those in the South China Sea, with harsh words. After analyzing the situation facing Trump Administration, we can draw two conclusions. First, only China can most possibly help relieve the Trump Administration from the current difficulties and consolidate its power. Second, the U.S. Asia-Pacific alliance system is seriously contradicting its own strategic interests. China and the U.S. enjoy bright prospects of cooperation. If the U.S. can make a wise strategic choice, the two countries can make great contributions to Asia-Pacific as well as the whole world.


The Reshaping of the Order in Asia-Pacific Region and the “Soft” Management and Control of Differences between China and the US

By Dr. Ma Fangfang, Associate Professor from School of International Relations, Beijing Language and Culture University. With the eastward shift of the global geostrategic focus, the establishment of a new order in the Asia-Pacific region and the maintenance of relative regional stability in the future may depend on the soft power equilibrium among multiple powers including China and the US. Compared with the “hard power equilibrium” which manifests itself as “a Roland for an Oliver”, the “soft power equilibrium” is mainly seen as a status in which the regional powers identify with and tolerate each other so as to remain in harmonious co-existence. Although there are strong uncertainties with regard to the development trend of the US Asia-Pacific policy of the Trump Administration, to maximize the US interests in such aspects as politics, economy, culture and security in the region will not change fundamentally. The establishment of a new order in the Asia-Pacific region can only be realized when China and the US correctly treat their structural contradictions in the region, rationally acknowledge the status of each other’s soft powers in the region, “softly” manage their differences, and engage in cooperation by enhancing strategic mutual trust.


Elements for a New EU Strategy on China: Policy Connotation and Posture

By Fang Lexian, Professor from the Center for European Studies and School of International Studies, Renmin University of China, and Guest Researcher of CPDS; and Guan Kongwen, Doctoral Student from the Center for European Studies and School of International Studies, Renmin University of China. Since the middle of 1990s, the EU has regularly published a series of policy documents on China in accordance with the changes of the international situation, particularly the new internal changes and challenges in China and Europe respectively in order to plan and direct the development of relations with China going forward. This relatively stylized tendency was very obvious before 2006. Since then, obsessed with multiple crises, the EU has had to focus its attention on internal affairs and issues in its neighborhood. Not until June of 2016, ten years from the publication of the last document, did the EU publish the policy document entitled Elements for a New EU Strategy on China, systematically re-planning the basic principles for EU’s new strategy toward China, policy framework and direction for actions in the future. This paper, based on the new policy document, has made a point of explaining the basic concepts and principles embodied in Elements for a New EU Strategy on China and the core connotation of this policy framework, before pondering over and summing up the characteristics and the new trend of Elements for a New EU Strategy on China by way of discussing the outstanding issues in the China-EU relationship.


Retrospect and Prospect of “Multispeed Europe” and Analysis of the Impact on China-Europe Relationship

By Dr. Long Jing, Assistant Research Fellow and Deputy Director of the Center for European Studies, Shanghai Institutes for International Studies. The concept of “multispeed Europe” has been heatedly discussed and debated during the development and expansion of the European Union. Meanwhile, it has also entered into practice by the launching of single currency in euro zone and the expansion of the Schengen zone. In recent years, the EU has created and developed a series of new instruments, such as the “opt-outs”, “open method of coordination” and “enhanced cooperation” to fulfill the demands of deeper integration in certain areas among related member states. While striving against the financial crisis since 2008, the EU has also accumulated more experiences to push the structure reform without unanimity. Currently, “multispeed Europe” is proposed again in an open way by the EU as an alternative for deeper integration. This new development trend may change the internal structure of the EU and its external policy, and also have significant impact to the China-Europe relationship.


The New Security Strategy of the EU and Its Impacts

By Zhou Xiaoming, Associate Professor from the Department of International Relations, School of Political Science and Public Administration, Wuhan University; and Zhao Fashun, Graduate Student from the Department of International Relations, School of Political Science and Public Administration, Wuhan University. In June of 2016, the EU issued its global strategy in the form of “CFSP”, namely the new security strategy of the EU. This strategy has laid down the principles of external actions and the primary task for the EU, with building a stronger Europe as its central target, and advancing both its interests and values as the guiding ideology. The chief feature of this strategy is that it is more practical, which will promote the security and defense construction of the EU, and exert positive impacts on the change of the global governance system. Nonetheless, in its implementation, this strategy will confront challenges from its member states and impediments of the existing systems. It is noteworthy that although the new security strategy of the EU has sent signals of deepening cooperation with China, its will is not very strong, and the strategy will have a definite impact on RCEP that China has strongly advocated.


Risks and Counter Measures in the Cooperation between China and Ukraine under the “One Belt and One Road” (OBOR) Initiative

By Dr. Zhang Hong, Research Fellow from the Institute of Russian, Eastern European & Central Asian Studies, CASS. As an important country that links Asia with Europe, Ukraine is very much interested in the OBOR initiative, wishing to engage in overall cooperation with China in infrastructure, investment, trade and culture under the framework of the OBOR initiative. But from the perspective of geopolitical environment, it is very difficult for Ukraine to free itself from the pressures of Russia in a short run, while the conflict in Donbas and the ethnic contradictions have made it hard for it to play a more engaged role in the OBOR. As a result, although there is a good historical foundation for China-Ukraine cooperation, many challenges confronted cannot be neglected, particularly as the security dilemma in Eastern Europe, the scale and direction of cooperation, the present political situation in Ukraine, and the bottlenecks of the “weak plus weak” cooperation model have all exerted negative impacts on the cooperation between China and Ukraine under the framework of the OBOR initiative. How to overcome these challenges is an important subject for China and Ukraine to advance their bilateral cooperation in the future.

Address: 9th-10th Floor, Guan Hai Building Citichamp Palace, Madian, Haidian District, Beijing 100088, China Tel: 86-10-82005566 Fax: 86-10-82007131
Administrative Office:86-10-82002138, 82005566 Ext.8008 Personnel Department:82005669 Ext. 8002
Department of American & Oceanian Affairs:82003022 82005566 Ext. 8030 Department of Asian Affairs:82002380 82005566 Ext. 8021
Department of European & Central Asian Affairs:82003512 82005566 Ext. 8039
2nd Department of Asian Affairs:82005953 82005566 Ext. 8038 Department of Council Affairs:82002375 82005566 Ext. 8023
Center for Peace and Development Studies: 82002580 82005566 Ext. 8060 Editorial Board of Peace and Development:82009436 82005566 Ext. 8063
Website:http://www.caifc.org.cn E-Mail:caifc@caifc.org.cn
Art Council (Art Academy of International Friendly Contact):86-10-62366878
Address:D5 Building, Jianxiang Mountain villa, No. 1A , Huayanbeili ,Dewaidajie ,Chaoyang District, Beijing Postal code:100029