Systemic Balancing and Regional Hedging: China–Russia Relations
Системное балансирование и региональное хеджирование: отношения между Китаем и Россией
2016-09-17
SCID: 54.1/tzjyufsk
Discuss with AI
China–Russia relationsgreat power politicslevels of analysisstrategic hedgingsystemic balancing
Figures from the paper
Abstract (AI)
There have been noticeable attempts in recent International Relations scholarship to introduce the concept of ‘hedging’ as an alternative to ‘balancing’ and ‘bandwagoning’. This article argues that to be useful in the analysis of great power politics hedging should not be understood as an alternative to balancing or bandwagoning, but as a phenomenon of a different order. In contrast to balancing or bandwagoning, which describe great powers’ behaviour in response to system-level forces, hedging denotes interstate political matters unfolding at the unit and regional levels. The analysis of China–Russia relations supports this understanding. Both great powers are strategically on the same page with respect to resisting unipolarity and other global political issues, but their strategies often diverge with respect to purely bilateral relations, or policies in their salient geographic environments. This two-level nature of China–Russia relations—balancing the Unipole while hedging towards one another—suggests that their global strategic behaviour and regional bilateral interactions are subject to different causal forces that push in different directions. The former is a reaction to system-level pressure, whereas the latter is a result of multiple unit-level factors. Therefore, in the analysis of great power relations, hedging occupies a specific rung on the ladder of levels of analysis.
Key Findings
1
Balancing and bandwagoning describe great-power responses to system-level forces, whereas hedging concerns interstate politics at unit and regional levels.
2
China and Russia jointly oppose unipolarity and align on global strategic issues, but their bilateral and regional policies frequently diverge.
3
China–Russia relations exhibit systemic balancing against the unipole alongside regional hedging toward each other.
4
Different causal forces shape the two levels: systemic pressure drives global alignment, while multiple unit-level factors influence regional and bilateral interactions.
5
Hedging should be conceptualized as distinct from balancing and bandwagoning, rather than as an alternative strategy to them.
Research Object
China–Russia bilateral relations
Research Subject
The two-level strategic behavior of China and Russia: systemic balancing against unipolarity alongside regional and bilateral hedging toward one another
Publication Details
Publication Date
2016-09-17
Journal
Publisher
ISSN
Open access PDF
Access Type
Author Information
Download PDF
Subscribe to digest