ABSTRACTS

01 America’s Policy towards China under Two Administrations in the Context of Great Changes: Difference, Influence and Enlightenment,by Zhang Wenzong, Research Professor and Deputy Director at the Institute for American Studies, CICIR; and Ou Ge, Doctoral Student at the School of International Relations, Beijing Foreign Studies University. In the context of the great changes unseen in a century, overall containment and suppression of China in the name of strategic competition has become a cross-party consensus in the United States, with the Republican Trump administration initiating the process of suppression and the Democratic Biden administration continuing and developing such a strategy. In the course of implementing this strategy, the two US administrations have certain differences in goals, means and other aspects: the Trump administration was more extreme and tougher, more unilateralist, and even going so far as to launch a comprehensive “new Cold War” against China,whereas the Biden administration has emphasized long-term competition with China, focusing on “competition management” while containing China. These differences are related to the personnel characteristics of the two administrations, their different campaign strategies and ideologies, as well as the interest groups they represent. The differences between the two parties’ China policies are long-term because they contain certain structural factors. After the 2024 election, if the Republican Party takes control of the White House, there will be a new change in US policy towards China. China should adhere to the bottom-line thinking and limit-oriented thinking, and handle the relations with different US administrations and parties in the United States according to the domestic political mechanism of the change of the US policy towards China and the needs of the situation, so as to safeguard its national interests to the maximum extent.

17 EU-NATO Relations: Trends, Implications and Responses,by Zheng Chunrong, Professor, Doctoral Supervisor and Director at the Center for German Studies, Tongji University; and Wang Xiaotong, Doctoral Student at the School of Politics and International Relations, Tongji University.In recent years, the geopolitical situation in Europe has undergone major changes. Under the influence of changes in the external environment and driven by their respective development strategies, the EU and NATO have strengthened their coordination and interaction, and their relations have shown some new trends: the topics of interaction between the two sides have been extended from the security and defense fields to the fields of frontier science and technology, the region covered has been expanded from Europe and its periphery to the Asia-Pacific region, and the institutionalization of dialogue and topic consultation at all levels has been continuously improved. Nonetheless, due to the competition between the EU and NATO for the dominance of European security,the persistent doubts about the policy consensus on Russia, and the difficulty of convergence of strategic focus and threat cognition between the two sides, the development of their relationship also has certain limitations. The enhanced interaction between the EU and NATO has weakened the strategic autonomy of the EU to a certain extent, not only exerting extensive impacts on the international and regional situation,but also intensifying the geopolitical tension in Europe. Meanwhile, the strengthening ties of the EU and NATO with the Indo-Pacific region will lead to the complication of the security situation in the region and have an impact on the strategic environment around China. In this regard,China should do its best to manage differences and prevent geopolitical confrontation from escalating; make a distinction between Europe and the United States, and mitigate their joint suppression of China; and at the same time engage Europe in closer practical cooperation in various fields.

37 An Assessment of the “India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor”Plan,by Ba Dianjun, Professor, Doctoral Supervisor and Deputy Director at the Center for Northeast Asian Studies, Jilin University; Feng Guan and Zuo Tianquan, Doctoral Students at the Institute for Northeast Asian Studies, Jilin University, Jilin University. In September 2023, the United States, India and several countries from the Middle East and European Union jointly launched a plan to build the “India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor” out of the consideration for their respective strategic interests. This plan aims to integrate various elements along the corridor and establish a coordinated entity to address technical, design, financing,legal, related regulatory standards and other issues for the construction of the corridor, and stimulate economic development through enhancing connectivity and economic integration between Asia, the Arabian Gulf and Europe, thus revealing geostrategic intentions. Due to such factors as the complex and volatile geopolitical situation, the complicated multinational coordination, difficulties in financing the project construction, and unclear prospects for the US presidential election, there are still many uncertainties for the “India-Middle East-Europe Economic Corridor” from plan to implementation. However, if successfully implemented, the plan may have an important impact on the world and regional situation, and bring pressure of geostrategic competition on the “Belt and Road” construction.In view of this, China needs to respond appropriately.

56 The Influence of the Evolution of Major-Country Relations on the Regional Landscape of Northeast Asia and Its Characteristics,by Han Xiandong, Professor at the Department of International Politics under the School of Political Science and Public Administration, and Director at the Center for Korean Peninsular Studies, China University of Political Science and Law. Major-country competition is neither the background of the current era nor the entirety of major-country relations. Although the current competition between major countries has intensified, unlike in the past, it is difficult to develop in the form of pure competition. The economic interdependence of countries brought about by the development of globalization and the mutual demand in the governance of global issues have made interaction and cooperation more necessary than competition in the relations between major countries. It is worth noting that the relationship between major countries has a direct and important impact on the formation and features of the regional landscape, which can determine the basic structure of regional power pattern, and the policy changes of regional countries due to domestic political factors may also change the alignment of relations between them, thus further complicating the regional situation. Such factors as the gathering of major countries in Northeast Asia, the interlocking of alliance relations, the high industrial interdependence among China, Japan and South Korea, the particularity

82 The “Change” and “Unchanged” of China-ASEAN Relations under the Great Changes Unseen in a Century and Its Enlightenment,by Luo Shengrong, Senior Fellow and Doctoral Supervisor at the Institute for the Belt and Road Studies, Yunnan University; and Fang Hao, Assistant Research Fellow at the Center for Neighborhood Diplomacy Studies,Yunnan University. The great changes unseen in a century have promoted major adjustments in the world landscape, and China-ASEAN relations have shown the characteristics of phased evolution. The “change” and “unchanged” caused by the interactions between the two situations have a profound impact on the current and future directions of bilateral relations. From the perspective of “change”, China-ASEAN relations have changed from opposing camps during the Cold War to good-neighborly friendship after the end of the Cold War, from homogeneous competition to heterogeneous complementarity, form lack of security mutual trust to relative security dependence, from bilateral drive to multilateral coordination, and from mutual conflict to integration and mutual learning.However, from the perspective of “unchanged”, the deficit of political mutual trust between the two sides remains, the South China Sea dispute and other geopolitical structural contradictions still hinder the deepening of bilateral relations, the underlying logic of power diplomacy between the two has not changed, the trade imbalance between China and ASEAN and the imbalance in its internal trade have always existed, and the conflict of value identification between the two sides is looming. In this regard, to advance China-ASEAN relations in the new era, we must firmly safeguard ASEAN centrality, make full use of the opportunities created by the entry into force of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership(RCEP) and the implementation of the Global Development Initiative, and strengthen the “ballast” role of economy in bilateral relations. At the same time, we should understand ASEAN’s legitimate concerns about security of DPRK-ROK relations, the political division within South Korea, and the continuous strengthening of trilateral military cooperation by the United States, which has extensive interests in the region, with its allies of Japan and South Korea, will not only affect the development trend of the regional structure in Northeast Asia, but also have a structural impact on the strategic landscape of Asia and the world.and geopolitical interests, jointly implement the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative with ASEAN, and jointly uphold genuine multilateralism and build a regional order based on equality and mutual consultation in Southeast Asia.

105 The Influence of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework of the United States on China-ASEAN Relations and Its Countermeasures,by Dr.Xing Ruili, Assistant Professor at the School of Marxism, and Senior Fellow at the University Center for International Strategy and Security Studies, NUAA. ASEAN occupies an important place in the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” of the United States, and is one of the key targets of the US to compete for and win over in its strategic competition with China. ASEAN countries generally hold a positive cognition of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and adopt a dual response strategy of “leverage” and “balance”, and the cooperation with the United States under the framework around the digital economy, supply chain resilience,clean energy and other core issues has shown a significant warming trend. The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework launched by the United States has a two-sided impact on China-ASEAN relations, forming a pressure to divide the relationship between the two sides. However, as the framework is in competition with the regional cooperation framework led by ASEAN in nature, it also provides an opportunity for the development of China-ASEAN relations. In view of this, China should rationally view the economic cooperation between ASEAN and the United States, and deepen the cooperation between China and ASEAN, based on the overall situations at home and abroad, through strengthening strategic alignment and upgrading institutional cooperation to minimize the negative impact of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” on China-ASEAN relations to the greatest possible extent.

134 South Korea’s “China View”: Construction, Evolution and Motivation,by Wang Xingxing, Professor and Doctoral Supervisor at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs, and Director at the Center for Korean Peninsula and Asia-Pacific Studies, Shanghai International Studies University. South Korea’s “China view” is embodied in its national history view, political security view, economic development view, geopolitical view and so on. From the historical track of the evolution of South Korea’s “China view”, “flunkeyism” and “Chinese model” are the two basic logics. Its historical change is manifested, in the cognitive dimension, as the evolution of the “CCP view” and “China view” through the periods of unity, clarity and ambiguity; in the horizontal dimension, as the change of the binary opposition from “distance from China” to “close to China” wrought by the interactions of economic and trade development, political and military affairs, ideology, as well as social and cultural factors; and in the vertical dimension, as the historical change from hostility to friendship, and then possibly to alienation. The construction and evolution of South Korea’s “China view” is influenced by its national psychology and ideology, political system and economic structure, domestic and international positioning, shaping of social and public opinions, as well as major historical events between China and South Korea. In order to effectively shape a positive “China view” in South Korea, China should encourage the two sides to jointly establish an exchange and cooperation mechanism for think tanks in political and security fields and a communication mechanism for regular personnel exchange in economic and trade fields, and tap the common cultural implications of the two countries in the fields of national culture and create a joint cultural industry.