Number of the records: 1  

Transnational Sites of China’s Cultural Diplomacy: Central Asia, Southeast Asia, Middle East and Europe Compared

  1. 1.
    SYSNO ASEP0535574
    Document TypeM - Monograph Chapter
    R&D Document TypeMonograph Chapter
    TitleChina’s ‘Silk Road’ Public Diplomacy in Central Asia: Rethinking the ‘Network’ Approach to the Study of Public Diplomacy and Its Instrumentalism
    Author(s) Exnerová, Věra (OU-W) RID, SAI
    Source TitleTransnational Sites of China’s Cultural Diplomacy: Central Asia, Southeast Asia, Middle East and Europe Compared. - Singapore : Palgrave Macmillan, 2020 / Ptáčková J. ; Klimeš O. ; Rawnsley G. - ISBN 978-981-15-5591-6
    Pagess. 65-87
    Number of pages23 s.
    Number of pages230
    Publication formPrint - P
    Languageeng - English
    CountrySG - Singapore
    Keywordsdiplomacy ; Silk Road ; China
    Subject RIVAD - Politology ; Political Sciences
    OECD categoryPolitical science
    R&D ProjectsGA15-21829S GA ČR - Czech Science Foundation (CSF)
    Institutional supportOU-W - RVO:68378009
    DOI10.1007/978-981-15-5592-3_4
    AnnotationThis chapter shows how the Chinese government’s foreign policy agenda offers opportunities and benefits to public and cultural actors in Central Asia through the ‘Silk Road’ initiative. It begins by contextualizing the ‘Silk Road’ public diplomacy strategy in terms of the general debates on soft power and the public diplomacy of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). It analyzes the conceptual framework for studying people-to-people exchange and the involvement of local actors and notes that the Chinese state and its policies are mostly studied as imposed, top-down, and thus inauthentic initiatives. The chapter then uses the ‘network approach’ to public diplomacy (Hocking 2005) as well as debates on the instrumentalism of cultural policy (Nisbett 2013) to introduce a new perspective into the debate. The approach is illustrated using examples of dynamics within the academic and cultural networks in the major cities of Almaty (in Kazakhstan) and Tashkent (in Uzbekistan). In the conclusion, the chapter suggests adopting insights from transnationalism to study public diplomacy and, specifically, explores how the scope of the study of the ‘new public diplomacy’ might be theoretically broadened in the future. The chapter argues that public diplomacy not only needs a ‘new’ name or perception, but also needs to step outside of critical or applied approaches and to change units of reference and analysis that are not dependent only on ‘China’ (or the nation-state) and the idea of monocentric distribution of power, interests, and resources.
    WorkplaceOriental Institute
    ContactZuzana Kvapilová, kvapilova@orient.cas.cz, Tel.: 266 053 950
    Year of Publishing2021
Number of the records: 1  

  This site uses cookies to make them easier to browse. Learn more about how we use cookies.