Regional Institutions and Cooperative Security: Chinese Approaches and Policies

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
Chinese positions on multilateralism and regional institutions in managing Asia-Pacific security have undergone gradual but noticeable changes over the years. Beijing's initial hesitation and to some extent, suspicion, was that multilateral forums could be used for small powers to gang up on China, especially regarding its defense modernization and territorial disputes in the South China Sea; that an outside major power like the United States could dominate these organizations; and that Taiwan could be granted official status and the Taiwan issue could be internationalized in multilateral discussions. China gradually became more involved in and of late has become a strong supporter of ARF activities since the Asian version of multilateralism, with an “ASEAN Way” of gradualism, consensus, informality in institution building and, more importantly, as an alternative to military alliances. However, China was, and remains today, opposed to transplanting the European security models to the Asia-Pacific region, or establishing any institutionalized mechanisms for dealing with regional security issues since the countries in the region are vastly different in terms of history, culture, political and social systems, and different visions of national security and priorities. While China has gradually become more receptive to multilateralism, it has always emphasized multi-channel and multi-level approaches to regional security building. Beijing argues that regional security issues should be dealt with by a variety of channels, including bilateral, multilateral, and sometimes unilateral approaches at both governmental and non-governmental levels. Chinese official statements and analyses, however, reveal a preference for bilateralism and a form of minilateralism approximating great-power consultations. Clearly, a balanced assessment of China's attitudes toward regional institutions and multilateralism should be made within the broader contexts of its past experiences, current concerns, the evolving regional security environment, and the dynamics of domestic politics.