EU-CHINA RELATIONS IN AN EVOLVING MULTIPOLAR INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM: A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF NEO-CLASSICAL REALISM AND NEO-REALISM
Abstract
The EU and China have been competing great powers with their capacities and capabilities at a time when the international system has evolved into multipolarity. In the current conjuncture, the demise of US unipolarity may have an easing effect on EU-China relations. The main research question of this article is: “How can neo-classical realism explain EU-China relations in comparison with neo-realism?”. The claim that the multipolar international system leads to great power rivalry is the major reason why the neo-classical realist perspective constitutes the major theoretical framework of this article. This article argues that “EU-China relations can be better understood by utilising the explanatory and predictive power of neo-classical realism when compared to neo-realism”. The article evaluates EU-China relations with the help of three case examples to support its argument. The study first presents an overview of the major claims and general scope of neo-realism and identifies this theory’s limitations in explaining EU-China relations. Then, the weaknesses of neo-realism in explaining the international system are analysed with the help of neo-classical realism in order to demonstrate why neoclassical realism offers a more explanatory framework in analysing EU-China relations
Keywords
References
- Albertoni, N. and Wise, C. (2020) “International Trade Norms in the Age of Covid-19 Nationalism on the Rise?”, Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 14(1): 41-66.
- Ashford, E. and Cooper, E. (2023) “Yes, the world is multipolar”, 5 October, <https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/10/05/usa-china-multipolar-bipolar-uni polar/>, (11 December 2023).
- Birnbaum, M. (2018) “As Trump hammers NATO allies on defense spending, military planners worry about his ‘2 percent’ obsession”, 10 July, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/trump-wants-all-of-nato-spending-2-percent-on-defense-but-does-that-even-make-sense/2018/07/ 10/6be06da2-7f08-11e8-a63f-7b5d2aba7ac5_story.html>, (23 October 2022).
- Brattberg, E. (2021) “Merkel’s Mixed Legacy on China”, 30 September, <https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/09/30/merkel-s-mixed-legacy-on-china-pub-85471>, (23 October 2022).
- Brattberg, E. and Soula, E. (2018) “Europe’s Emerging Approach to China’s Belt and Road Initiative”, 19 October, <https://carnegieendowment. org/2018/10/19/europe-s-emerging-approach-to-china-s-belt-and-road-initiative-pub-77536>, (19 March 2023).
ÇOK KUTUPLULUĞA EVRİLEN ULUSLARARASI SİSTEMDE AB-ÇİN İLİŞKİLERİ: NEO-KLASİK REALİZM İLE NEO-REALİZMİN KARŞILAŞTIRMALI ANALİZİ
Abstract
AB ve Çin, uluslararası sistemin çok kutupluluğa evrildiği bir dönemde, kapasite ve kabiliyetleriyle büyük güçlerle rekabet etmektedir. Mevcut konjonktürde ABD'nin tek kutupluluğunun sona ermesi AB-Çin ilişkilerini anlamada kolaylaştırıcı bir etki yaratabilir.Bu makalenin temel araştırma sorusu şudur: “Neo-klasik realizm, AB-Çin ilişkilerini neo-realizm ile karşılaştırıldığında nasıl açıklayabilir?”Çok kutuplu uluslararası sistemin büyük güç rekabetine yol açtığı iddiası, neo-klasik realist bakış açısının bu makalenin temel teorik çerçevesini oluşturmasının ana nedenidir. makale, “AB-Çin ilişkilerinin, neo-klasik realizmin neo-realizme kıyasla açıklayıcı ve öngörücü gücünden yararlanılarak daha iyi anlaşılabileceğini” ileri sürmektedir. Makale, AB-Çin ilişkilerini, iddiasını destekleyecek şekilde, üç örnek olayla değerlendirmektedir. Çalışma öncelikle neo-realizmin argümanlarına genel bir bakış sunmakta ve bu teorinin AB-Çin ilişkilerini açıklamadaki sınırlılıklarını belirlemektedir. Sonrasında çalışma, AB-Çin ilişkilerinin analizinde neo-klasik realizmin neden daha açıklayıcı bir çerçeve sunduğunu göstermek için neo-realizmin zayıf yönlerini göstermektedir.
Keywords
References
- Albertoni, N. and Wise, C. (2020) “International Trade Norms in the Age of Covid-19 Nationalism on the Rise?”, Fudan Journal of the Humanities and Social Sciences, 14(1): 41-66.
- Ashford, E. and Cooper, E. (2023) “Yes, the world is multipolar”, 5 October, <https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/10/05/usa-china-multipolar-bipolar-uni polar/>, (11 December 2023).
- Birnbaum, M. (2018) “As Trump hammers NATO allies on defense spending, military planners worry about his ‘2 percent’ obsession”, 10 July, <https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/trump-wants-all-of-nato-spending-2-percent-on-defense-but-does-that-even-make-sense/2018/07/ 10/6be06da2-7f08-11e8-a63f-7b5d2aba7ac5_story.html>, (23 October 2022).
- Brattberg, E. (2021) “Merkel’s Mixed Legacy on China”, 30 September, <https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/09/30/merkel-s-mixed-legacy-on-china-pub-85471>, (23 October 2022).
- Brattberg, E. and Soula, E. (2018) “Europe’s Emerging Approach to China’s Belt and Road Initiative”, 19 October, <https://carnegieendowment. org/2018/10/19/europe-s-emerging-approach-to-china-s-belt-and-road-initiative-pub-77536>, (19 March 2023).
Details
| Primary Language | English |
|---|---|
| Subjects | European and Region Studies |
| Journal Section | Makaleler |
| Authors | |
| Publication Date | December 29, 2023 |
| Submission Date | October 10, 2023 |
| Acceptance Date | November 25, 2023 |
| Published in Issue | Year 2023 |