New Paper | A More Nuanced Lexicon: Heterogeneity, Vulnerability, and Uncertainty in China Studies

May 29, 2024 – The Asia Society Policy Institute has released a new paper entitled A More Nuanced Lexicon: Heterogeneity, Vulnerability, and Uncertainty in China Studies. The author, Pascale Massot, is a Non-Resident Honorary Fellow at ASPI’s Center for China Analysis, a Senior Fellow at the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada, and an Associate Professor at the School of Political Studies, University of Ottawa.

“At a time when understanding China has become more critical than ever, it has become more difficult to do so. This is both because of real constraints, such as the increased difficulty of access given hardening looks on the Chinese side, as well as an atmosphere in the West that has made China less attractive as an object of study,” writes Massot. To challenge common frames of looking at China, Massot proposes looking at behavior from the international Chinese government through the frames of “heterogeneity,” “vulnerability,” and “uncertainty.”

According to the paper, scholars have a tendency to ascribe excessive unity to the Chinese government and its actions, which Massot says can be misleading. “First, failing to pay attention to important variations in government within policy areas has the unfortunate consequence of obscuring the varied interests of different Chinese stakeholders, especially when their preferences do not align with central party-state organs,” says Massot. “Second, by failing to pay attention to important variations in Chinese behavior across policy areas, we are less able to modulate foreign policy postures accordingly.” Instead, being attuned to variations in the Chinese government and its actions can enable an honest evaluation of China’s international behavior.

“The second analytical frame of Chinese government behavior abroad, and one that we can gain analytical leverage by challenging, is the frame of ‘power,’” writes Massot. “Of course, China is a great power, but an appreciation of Chinese positions of ‘vulnerability’ can yield important insight.”

One example is China’s pursuit of a dominant position in global minerals supply chains, which can be explained by the sense of vulnerability felt by Chinese commodities market stakeholders. Another is wolf-warrior diplomacy, which, according to Massot, “was driven at least in part by internal political one-upmanship dynamics that were the direct consequence of Xi Jinping’s consolidation of power.”

“The third frame that can hinder our analysis of China’s rise is one of ‘linearity’ and ‘predictability’ regarding historical trajectories, as opposed to a highly ‘nonlinear’ or ‘uncertainty’ frame,” writes Massot. Understanding China’s rise as a linear, calculated process “discounts the role of unforeseen circumstances, the complex interplay of variables at the international level, and the role of leadership, and tends to overestimate both the capacity of Chinese actors to achieve their goals internationally and mischaracterize the potential for other actors to shape and respond to China’s behavior.”

Read the full paper here.