Yalın Akçevin History of Modern China Wolf Warrior Diplomacy and Chinese Soft Power: K-Pop As a Testing Ground Increasingly In
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Yalın Akçevin History of Modern China Wolf Warrior Diplomacy and Chinese Soft Power: K-Pop as a Testing Ground Increasingly in the latter half of the 20th century, authoritarianism and soft power have shown to be rather incompatible as our experiences have shown through a number of different events. In each instance, countries with authoritarian and oppressive political rulers were snubbed and denied chances – with varying degree of success – to recast themselves through the building up of their soft power. Today, the world still faces such authoritarian states and actors aiming to build up their soft power bases so as to be able to influence foreign audiences and recast their images in a better light, including the People’s Republic of China (China) and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). However, with the opening up of a new diplomatic era of “wolf warrior diplomacy” lead by Xi Jinping and the emergence of a much more assertive, aggressive, and bellicose style of diplomacy and foreign policy, a number of questions are sure to emerge. For the purposes of this paper, two of these questions are especially important. One is the question of how this wolf warrior diplomacy will impact Chinese soft power prospects in the future and the second is the question of whether it is possible to anticipate the forms and scale of this impact through forms of soft power available to us and to China today. This is certainly no easy task, especially so because Chinese soft power is limited and there are no socio-cultural spaces created by Chinese soft power which could be analyzed for such an impact. Furthermore, if they existed it would only be possible to measure outside reaction to such spaces in the face of wolf warrior diplomacy, leaving out internal changes and community reactions to the introduction of wolf warrior style actions to their socio-cultural space. In addition, no Chinese soft power socio-cultural space could mirror the global democratic order which would be the primary target of the wolf warriors, as well as the primary reactors to their actions. However, it is possible to locate a socio-cultural space which would then act as a 1 Yalın Akçevin History of Modern China microcosm for the global democratic order over which both the impact of and reactions to wolf warrior diplomacy with regards to China’s soft power prospects can be examined and understood. The socio-cultural space in question, which I will be focusing on as part of this paper, is that of K-Pop, which could not only – as I shall discuss – act as a microcosm for the global democratic order but also is an alternative for a Chinese soft power socio-cultural space as well, since the Chinese are part of it both in its production as artists and in its consumption as a large market. Thus, in a sense, the socio-cultural space around K-Pop is a hybrid that would allow for us to examine the different pulls and impacts of different actors, and most importantly those of China and the CCP, and the global democratic order. As such, this paper will aim to use the socio-cultural space of K-Pop as a microcosm for the global democratic order and discuss the apparent and possible effects of wolf warrior diplomacy on Chinese soft power prospects, through the insights gained from an examination of Chinese participation in the socio-cultural space around K-Pop. To this end, I will be asking the question of how can the effects of wolf warrior diplomacy be on Chinese soft power be understood through an analysis of Chinese reactions to and participation in the global and democratic socio-cultural space of K-Pop. I will be arguing, that the adoption of the wolf warrior diplomacy, both by the Chinese state which reacts to K-Pop socio-cultural space and the Chinese K-Pop idols – who are performing in an increasingly global and democratic socio-cultural space – will result in the decline of both Chinese participation in this socio-cultural space and damage Chinese soft power prospects at large. By pursuing such a point, this paper will begin laying down the groundwork for discussion about wolf warrior diplomacy and soft power dynamics in the Chinese context, opening the way for more in-depth and sophisticated discussion on the state of Chinese soft power under and as managed by wolf warrior diplomats. 2 Yalın Akçevin History of Modern China The paper will be divided into three sections, geared towards exploring the key elements and topics with an eye for connections and impacts on one another. The first section will begin by exploring the state of Chinese soft power today, especially focusing on its sources and its current state of success, aiming to better understand the position of the CCP on the question of soft power and provide the contextual grounds for the ensuing discussion. The second section focuses on the wolf warrior diplomacy itself, with an eye for both what this new diplomatic style espoused by Beijing is and what its implications are with regards to the generation and maintenance of soft power. The third section will then turn towards a brief discussion of K-Pop in terms of the socio-cultural space it provides for the Chinese to react to and act within, keeping a particular focus on what aspects of this space might become problematic when met with wolf warrior diplomacy. After providing an overview, this section will then deal with brief case studies of three incidents where a clash between the Chinese and K-Pop’s socio-cultural space can be understood in the context of wolf warrior diplomacy. Chinese Soft Power in the 21st Century The CCP’s quest to build soft power has been an ongoing process – which one can stretch all the way back to 1949 by classifying propaganda pieces as an attempt to build up soft power – that has been especially pointed and accelerated with the turn of the twenty first century. The need to build up China’s prestige and soft power was recognized by Hu Jintao, who bemoaned the poor state of China’s soft power bases and called for the building up and expansion of the country’s soft power capabilities and structures.1 Thus, the leadership circles of the CCP have long been aware of the weakness of Chinese soft power and the – strategic – need to build it up 1 Nigel Inkster. "Chinese culture and soft power." Survival 60.3 (2018): 65.; David Shambaugh. "China's soft-power push: The search for respect." Foreign Affairs (2015) 94.4: 99.; Jacques deLisle. "Foreign Policy through Other Means: Hard Power, Soft Power, and China's Turn to Political Warfare to Influence the United States." Orbis (2020): 183. 3 Yalın Akçevin History of Modern China to a level that could compete with other powers, among which the US is a particularly strong benchmark to match and overtake. Furthermore, the CCP and the Chinese intellectuals who are working on the concept of soft power have come to formulate for themselves a specific conceptualization of soft power, which guides China’s policy choices and actions. In this view, soft power is conceptualized in terms of culture, which leaves other considerations such as political systems and policy choices as a minority opinion, and brings about a reframing of actions and policy so as to promote Chinese culture and then evaluate progress in terms of success of such promotion.2 This in itself brings forwards certain differences in which the CCP’s quest for a soft power is constructed different than that of its foreign counterparts. From the outset, this cultural approach presents for the CCP the challenge of defining what the Chinese culture and values it will officially sanction, cultivate, and promote across the globe for an international audience to consume. Thus, it allows for the creation of a “Chinese culture” which is hand-crafted to serve the prestige and soft power needs of the state.3 Such a purposefully constructed culture, might not only appear artificial when observed by a foreign audience but can also be full of loopholes and contradictions, as such selectively picked components across a nation’s history and culture might not sit well together. In the case of China, it can be observed that – in the absence of a contemporary and ideological foundation, as compared to an abundance of traditional sources – the construction of this soft power oriented Chinese culture borrows heavily from the traditions of Confucianism, Taoism, and Mozi among others.4 More specifically, this constructed culture is based on the ideas of “Harmony, “The 2 Wu You. "The rise of China with cultural soft power in the age of globalization." Journal of Literature and Art Studies 8.5 (2018): 764.; Bonnie S. Glaser, and Melissa E. Murphy. "Soft power with Chinese characteristics." Chinese soft power and its implications for the United States (2009): 10, 13, 16, 17. 3 Inkster, “Chinese Culture”, p. 67 4 Inkster, “Chinese Culture”, p. 68; Glaser and Melissa, “Chinese Characteristics”, p. 15 4 Yalın Akçevin History of Modern China Golden Mean”, and “Propriety” which are placed on a pedestal as the timeless essence of Chinese culture, which would now earn China its deserved soft power.5 What is being stressed here is not necessarily unpalatable to the outside observer, however, the context from which they spring and the manner in which they are pushed is problematic. This constructed Chinese culture, at the hands of the CCP which wields it, becomes a tool of justifying the form of authoritarianism and oppression with which the party has maintained its grip over China.