An Organizational Rhetorical Analysis of the Us
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Texas A&M University TOWARDS COOPERATION: AN ORGANIZATIONAL RHETORICAL ANALYSIS OF THE U.S.-CHINA STRATEGIC AND ECONOMIC DIALOGUE A Dissertation by ROBERT HINCK Submitted to the Office of Graduate and Professional Studies of Texas A&M University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY Chair of Committee, Alan Kluver Committee Members, Charles Conrad Nathan Crick William Norris Head of Department, Kevin Barge August 2017 Major Subject: Communication Copyright 2017 Robert Schaefer Hinck ABSTRACT This study analyzes the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogues (S&ED) to uncover the organizational and rhetorical mechanisms by which U.S. and Chinese officials attempt to forge cooperative relations while managing issues of conflict. I argue for a communication centered approach for understanding geopolitical relations and the socialization process by which norms and values take root amongst U.S. and Chinese officials. To do so, I draw upon organizational institutionalism to uncover competing organizational logics guiding and constraining the S&ED through an organizational rhetorical lens while also providing a new theoretical conception of public diplomacy as a means to legitimize the S&ED as a mechanism for managing the complex bilateral relationship. Texts under analysis include the press releases, speeches, memos of understanding, and agreements published following each of the eight annual S&ED meetings from 2009-2016, totaling over 160 documents. Findings suggest that the S&ED defines both the dialogue mechanism and bilateral relationship as founded upon a central logic of “positive, cooperative, and comprehensive” relations between the two countries. Resulting from this logic, both the economic and strategic tracks of the S&ED focus on producing ever increasing, tangible outcomes encompassing wider areas of cooperation each year. These outcomes occur most significantly within the economic track discussions as well cooperation on climate change and exchange programs. Not until the later years of the S&ED, with the incorporation of a “new model of major country relations” are more security related ii issues addressed, with criticism of diverging view points on sensitive issues naturalized as expected given the S&ED’s value of dialogue and attention redirected from these issues to focus on the positive outcomes reached in other areas. Success of the S&ED relies upon self-reflexive praise by participants of the S&ED regarding its effectiveness in order to justify to domestic constituencies in both nations the continuance and support of the dialogue mechanism. This suggests that even after eight years of meeting, the dialogue mechanism is a fragile one, predicated on producing continuous success. Nonetheless, the breadth and number of agreements, exchanges, and growth of coordination between the bureaucracies of each country demonstrates that cooperation is possible. iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This dissertation project is the culmination of many discussions I have enjoyed with professors, graduate students, friends, and family throughout my six years of graduate study without which I would not have been able to complete this study. As such, I would like to briefly recognize some of the most influential individuals aiding me in this journey. Dr. Kluver – your guidance and support throughout my time at Texas A&M empowered me to pursue this project as well as others merging communication studies to international relations. Without your enthusiasm and support I would never have pushed myself to undertake such a project. Thank you for your time and quick turnaround reading my chapters. Dr. Conrad – thank you for the many enriching conversations and guidance as I shared my preliminary ideas and approaches to this project. Your classes and perspectives on organizational rhetoric and power have deeply influenced how I have come to see organizational life in both domestic and international contexts and will continue to influence my work in the years to come. Dr. Crick – thank you for widening and deepening my understanding of rhetorical theory. Your constant pushing and questioning has truly shaped my understanding of what rhetoric is and what rhetorical study can look like in ways I would never have seen without your mentorship. While I wished to have iv included more of a true rhetorical approach in this project, I nonetheless leave this project with a strong foundation upon which I will continue to push rhetorical scholarship to international issues. Dr. Norris – thank you for the large reading lists on China studies and U.S.-China relations. While daunting at the time, the readings and resources you made available granted me the ability to analyze and understand the dynamics behind the S&ED much more accessible. Indeed, without your support of the topic I would never have gone forward with this study. Finally, I want to thank you for the methodological focus you provided in your courses. Your emphasis on identifying the mechanisms driving outcomes and clarity in setting up cases to test these mechanisms will be an enduring lesson I will take away from your courses. Finally, I must thank my parents—Dr. Edward Hinck and Dr. Shelly Hinck. Without their support and guidance, I would never have entered the field of communication studies, nor would I have had such a strong foundation upon which to study it. Their support throughout my life and educational career cannot be duly summarized in this acknowledgment section. Lastly, thank you to my wife, Sara Kitsch, for putting up with me during this process. While writing your own dissertation, you still managed to provide me with the support to finish this project. Again, the time, care, and conversations you granted me cannot be adequately summarized here. Without you, this project would not have been finished. v CONTRIBUTORS AND FUNDING SOURCES Contributors This work was supervised by a dissertation committee consisting of Dr. Kluver [Advisor] and Dr. Conrad of the Department of Communication and Dr. Crick of the Department of Communication and Dr. Norris [Outside Department] of the Bush School of Government and Public Service. All work for the thesis (or) dissertation was completed independently by the student. Funding Sources There are no outside funding contributions to acknowledge related to the research and compilation of this document. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT ....................................................................................................................... ii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS .............................................................................................. iv CONTRIBUTORS AND FUNDING SOURCES ............................................................. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. vii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................................... ix LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................................. x CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ 1 The Establishment of the S&ED ............................................................................ 2 Design and Structure of the S&ED ........................................................................ 9 China’s Rise and the Institutionalization of U.S.-China Dialogues ..................... 12 The Use of Dialogues in U.S.-China Relations .................................................... 28 Argument and Overview Chapters ....................................................................... 33 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................... 38 Setting the Stage: Advances and Constraints within International Relations Theory .................................................................................................................. 38 Institutional Theory: Key Concepts and Theoretical Concerns .......................... 48 Public Diplomacy: Construction and Management of Identity, Image, and Reputation in Search of Institutional Legitimacy ................................................ 61 The Rhetoric of Diplomacy ................................................................................. 71 The Strategic and Economic Dialogue as Diplomatic Rhetoric? ........................ 87 Research Questions ............................................................................................. 93 CHAPTER III ORGANIZATIONAL RHETORIC AND METHODOLOGICAL LENS ............................................................................................................................... 96 Organizational Rhetoric as a Method of Inquiry ................................................. 96 Organizational Rhetoric as a Lens for Institutional Theory .............................. 108 Organizational Rhetoric as Method ................................................................... 111 Texts Under Analysis ........................................................................................ 113 vii CHAPTER IV THE S&ED’S PRIMARY INSTITUTIONAL LOGIC ........................ 118 Institutional Rhetoric of the S&ED ................................................................... 122 The Common Story: Stability