The Two Faces of Revisionism

Document Type : Original Article

Author

Faculty of Economics and Political Science,, Shahid Beheshti University,Tehran.Iran

Abstract

Introduction and Objectives: This article conceptualizes and analyzes the revisionism of two major global powers—China and the United States—within the liberal international order. Contrary to conventional approaches that portray China as the sole revisionist actor and the United States as the defender of the status quo, this research demonstrates that the United States has also become a revisionist power.
Methods: Utilizing qualitative research methods, including case studies and document analysis, this article examines the revisionist behavior of these two countries across various domains, such as international security, the global economy, the environment, and human rights. China seeks gradual, multi-layered changes in the international order by emphasizing cooperation within existing institutions and the creation of new ones. In contrast, the United States aims for more radical changes by leveraging its institutional power and agency. This research concludes that understanding the dual revisionism of these two powers is essential for better comprehending the future trajectory of international politics and the potential for conflict or cooperation between them.
Findings: The study's findings indicate that China, as an "embedded revisionist," strives to create gradual changes in the liberal international order through engagement with existing institutions and the establishment of new ones. China deepens its participation in international regimes, enhances access, and increases agency power, gradually and selectively altering aspects of these regimes while continuing to pursue this strategy. Conversely, the United States, as a "bridging revisionist," seeks to reconstruct the liberal international order through mobilizing alternative networks and broad institutional changes. The transformation of international security regimes by creating alternative networks, challenging financial, monetary, and trade regimes by developing a new sanction system and paralyzing the World Trade Organization, and efforts to redefine the human rights regime as a key normative dimension of the liberal international order are examples of the United States' strategic actions as a bridging revisionist.
Conclusion: The analysis of the revisionist behavior of China and the United States within the liberal international order reveals that both powers operate as revisionists with differing approaches. China, as an embedded revisionist, seeks gradual changes through predominantly selective interactions with existing institutions, while the United States, as a bridging revisionist, seeks more radical changes by redesigning aspects of the international order, leveraging its high levels of access and agency power. However, both powers are so deeply intertwined in this rules-based order that revolutionary revisionism does not align with their interests. The dual revisionism underscores the emerging complexities in the transformation of the liberal international order. In other words, to better understand the transformation of the liberal international order, it is necessary to move beyond the conventional dichotomy of revisionist powers versus status quo powers. The mainstream literature on revisionism in international relations has excessively focused on China's discourse and behavior as the key revisionist power, leading to an oversimplification and reductionism of the complex realities of transformation within the liberal international order. Analyzing the discourse and behavior of the United States as a bridging revisionist, along with its complex interactions with China as an embedded revisionist, can contribute to a more coherent understanding of the forces reshaping the liberal international order.

Keywords

References

‒ Bogdanova, I. (2023), Human rights and unilateral economic sanctions: A new perspective on a twisted relationship. European Yearbook on Human Rights 2023, 171-204.
‒ Chan, S. (2021), A peaceful transition of international order? In Contesting Revisionism: China, the United States, and the Transformation of International Order. Oxford Academic.
‒ Chan, S. & others. (2021), Contesting revisionism: China, the United States, and the transformation of international order. Oxford Academic.
‒ Chan, S. & others. (2021), Meaning of international order and evidence on revisionism. In Contesting Revisionism: China, the United States, and the Transformation of International Order. Oxford Academic.
‒ Coleman, K. P. & Job, B. L. (2021), How Africa and China may shape UN peacekeeping beyond the liberal international order. International Affairs, 97(5), 1451-1468.
‒ Congressional Research Service. (2023, June 21), U.S. withdrawal from the U. N. Human Rights Council (IF10576), CRS Reports. https://crsreports. congress. gov/product/pdf/IF/IF10576
‒ Cooley, A. Nexon, D. & Ward, S. (2019), Revising order or challenging the balance of military power? An alternative typology of revisionist and status-quo states. Review of International Studies, 45(4), 689-708.
‒ Drysdale, P. Triggs, A. & Wang, J. (2017), China's new role in the international financial architecture. Asian Economic Policy Review, 12, 258-277.
‒ Foot, R. (2024), Reining in a liberal UN: China, power shifts, and the UN's peace and security pillar. Global Policy, 15(Suppl. 2), 18-28.
‒ Goddard, S. E. (2018), Embedded revisionism: Networks, institutions, and challenges to world order. International Organization, 72(4), 763-797.
‒ Gowan, R. (2024), Accommodation available: China, Western powers and the operation of structural power in the UN Security Council. Global Policy, 15(Suppl. 2), 29-37.
‒ Hanson, P. (2021, April 6), Small eagle, big dragon: China's expanding role in UN peacekeeping. Royal United Services Institute. https://www. rusi. org/explore-our-research/publications/commentary/small-eagle-big-dragon-chinas-expanding-role-un-peacekeeping
‒ Hopewell, K. (2021), Strategic narratives in global trade politics: American hegemony, free trade, and the hidden hand of the state. The Chinese Journal of International Politics, 14(1), 51-86.
‒ Ikenberry, G. J. (2008), The rise of China and the future of the West. Foreign Affairs. Retrieved from https://www. foreignaffairs. com/articles/asia/2008-01-01/rise-china-and-future-west
‒ Ikenberry, G. J. (2018), The end of liberal international order? International Affairs, 94(1), 7-23.
‒ In: Chow, P. C. Y. (eds) The US Strategic Pivot to Asia and Cross-Strait Relations. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
‒ Inboden, R. S. (2021), Introduction. In China and the International Human Rights Regime (pp. 1-41). Cambridge University Press.
‒ Itzkowitz Shifrinson, J. R. (2016), Deal or no deal? The end of the Cold War and the U.S. offer to limit NATO expansion. International Security, 40(4), 7-44.
‒ Jamshidi, M; Yazdanshenas, Z (2020), "The Strategy of Pivot to Asia: The Rise of China and U.S. National Security Policy in Asia." Semi-Annual Journal of Political Science, No. 31, pp. 91-116. { In Persian}
‒ Kim, S. & Kim, S. H. (2022), China’s contestation of the liberal international order. The Pacific Review, 36(6), 1215-1240. ‒ Kustermans, J. de Carvalho, B. , & Beaumont, P. (2023), Whose revisionism, which international order? Social structure and its discontents. Global Studies Quarterly, 3(1).
‒ Lee, P. K. Heritage, A. , & Mao, Z. (2020), Contesting liberal internationalism: China’s renegotiation of world order. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 33(1), 52-60.
‒ Liu, L. (2020), Beyond the status quo and revisionism: An analysis of the role of China and the approaches of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to the global order. Asian Journal of Political Science, 29(1), 88-109.
‒ Maull, H. W. (Ed.). (2018), The Rise and Decline of the Post-Cold War International Order. Oxford Academic.
‒ Milkoreit, M. (2019), The Paris Agreement on climate change—Made in USA? Perspectives on Politics, 17(4), 1019-1037.
‒ Moniz Bandeira, L. A. (2017), From Bush’s Freedom Agenda to the Color Revolutions. In: The Second Cold War. Springer, Cham.
‒ Morton, K. (2016), China's ambition in the South China Sea: Is a legitimate maritime order possible? International Affairs, 92, 909-940.
‒ National Public Radio (2018, June 19), U.S. announces its withdrawal from U. N. 's human rights council. NPR. https://www. npr. org/2018/06/19/621435225/u-s-announces-its-withdrawal-from-u-n-s-human-rights-council.
‒ Noori, A. (2022), The nature of Russian and Chinese revisionism; Iran’s policy and interests. Central Eurasia Studies, 14(2), 371-396.
‒ Pang, Z. (2018), China and the struggle over the future of international order. In H. W. Maull (Ed.), The Rise and Decline of the Post-Cold War International Order. Oxford Academic.
‒ Schenk, C. R. (2021), The global financial crisis and banking regulation: Another turn of the wheel? Journal of Modern European History, 19(1), 8-13.
‒ Schweller, R. L. (1994), Bandwagoning for profit: Bringing the revisionist state back in. International Security, 19(1), 72-107.
‒ Shambaugh, D. (2001), China or America: Which is the revisionist power? Survival, 43(3), 25-30.
‒ Tannenwald, N. (2024), The nuclear nonproliferation regime as a “failed promise”: Contestation and self-undermining dynamics in a liberal order. Global Studies Quarterly, 4(2).
‒ Tobin, L. (2018), Xi's vision for transforming global governance: A strategic challenge for Washington and its allies. Texas National Security Review, 2(1).
‒ Turner, O. , & Nymalm, N. (2019), Morality and progress: IR narratives on international revisionism and the status quo. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 32(4), 407-428.
‒ Valdai International Discussion Club. (2015, October 7), Rising powers and revisionism in emerging international orders. Russia in Global Affairs. Retrieved from https://eng. globalaffairs. ru/articles/rising-powers-and-revisionism-in-emerging-international-orders/
‒ Ward, S. R. (2013), Race, status, and Japanese revisionism in the early 1930s. Security Studies, 22(4), 607-639.
‒ Weiss, J. C. & Wallace, J. L. (2021), Domestic politics, China’s rise, and the future of the liberal international order. International Organization, 75(2), 635-664.
‒ WESLEY, M. (Ed.) (2017), Global allies: Comparing US alliances in the 21st century. ANU Press.
‒ Wilson, J. D. (2019), The evolution of China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank: From a revisionist to status-seeking agenda. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 19(1), 147-176.
‒ Wolfers, A. (1962), Discord and collaboration: Essays on international politics. Johns Hopkins University Press.
‒ World Trade Organization. (n. d.), Appellate body. Retrieved July 31, 2024, from https://www. wto. org/english/tratop_e/dispu_e/appellate_body_e. htm
‒ Yang, J. (2022), Understanding China’s changing engagement in global climate governance: A struggle for identity. Asia Europe Journal, 20, 357-376.
‒ Zhao, S. (2018), A revisionist stakeholder: China and the post-World War II world order. Journal of Contemporary China, 27(113), 643-658.
‒ Zhao, T. (2024), Political drivers of China’s changing nuclear policy: Implications for U.S.- China nuclear relations and international security. CEIP: Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
‒ Schweller, R.L. & Xiaoyu, P. (2011), After unipolarity: China's visions of international order in an era of U.S. decline. International Security, 36(1), 41-72.
‒ Shafiee, N; Gholizadeh, A. (2012), "The Theory of Power Cycle: A Framework for Analyzing the Decline of U.S. Relative Power and the Rise of China." Foreign Relations Quarterly, Vol. 4, No. 4, pp. 137-168. [In Persian]

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics