TY - JOUR
AU1 - Sun, Linlin
AB - 1. Sovereignty is undeniably the most important concept in modern international law; it determines the horizontal structure of the international system of States. Sovereignty in China: A Genealogy of a Concept Since 1840 explores China’s changing perception of sovereignty from the country’s initial encounter with international law until today. In a nutshell, the book tells the story of how China abandoned its traditional view of world order and, over the course of 180 years, embraced modern international law founded on State sovereignty as a new world order. 2. Chapter 1 serves as a prelude to the story, presenting the underlying theme of the book: the “clash of orders” between the West and China. The focus is on the peculiarities of the traditional Chinese worldview: a Sinocentric tianxia (all under heaven) system. The author argues that the hierarchical and cosmological normative order of China was bound to clash with the world order of the West – based on the principles of equality and the independence of States – when the two came in contact. In addition, the chapter serves as a reference point when visions of a future world order based on the Chinese tradition are discussed in the book’s concluding chapter (pp. 223-225). 3. Building upon the conceptual background introduced in Chapter 1, Chapters 2 to 6 embark on the main task: to examine the process of appropriation and use of modern international law and the idea of State sovereignty by Chinese intellectuals and diplomats in five time-periods. 4. Chapter 2 covers the first phase, between the First Opium War of 1839-1842 and the Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. It shows that enlightened Chinese intellectuals, officials and diplomats started to study international law in translation as a Western field of knowledge, produce new maps of the world, reconsider China’s status within the family of nations and employ the term “sovereignty” to defend China’s interest in frontier areas and tributaries. In spite of the changes, the then-existing tianxia system was still the dominant conceptual paradigm. “Moralization of international law” (pp. 62, 76) in this phase took the form of translating and discussing international law. 5. China’s defeat in the Sino-Japanese War was a “turning point” (p. 30); it prompted a radical change in the Chinese perception of international law and sovereignty. Chapter 3 explains what changed in the last 15 years of the Qing dynasty (1895-1911, the second phase), and how the change occurred. Carrai shows that China’s deepening crisis led the country’s intellectuals to become disillusioned with the tianxia system and forced them to face the new reality of fighting for “the survival of the country” (p. 87). They found solutions in transforming China “into a modern sovereign nation” (p. 89) and “embracing international law as a worldview” (pp. 30, 99). This radical change can be attributed to the influence of Japanese scholarship on international law and, more importantly, to the influence of “social Darwinism” (p. 94). 6. Carrai’s account then shifts from the epistemic to the practical aspects of sovereignty in the third phase – the Republican period of 1912-1949. Chapter 4 examines how Republican diplomats and jurists used legal terms innovatively to achieve the goal of securing China’s sovereignty and how they became actively involved in international affairs to enhance China’s international status. Specifically, Carrai shows how they employed the concepts of the “right to exist” (p. 114) and “self-determination” (pp. 111-114) to support their efforts to abolish unequal treaties and uphold China’s territorial sovereignty, especially in frontier areas. Carrai also shows that diplomats and jurists adopted an internationalist approach and contributed to the establishment and operation of international organizations like the League of Nations and the United Nations. Given these developments, the author considers the Republican period a “key” (p. 151) phase in China’s promotion of State sovereignty. 7. The founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC), in contrast, brought about an “ideological rupture” (p. 152). Chapter 5 covers the first four decades of the PRC (1949-1989, the fourth phase), in which the discourse of sovereignty was imprinted with Marxist-Leninist ideology and a dichotomy between the Western worldview and the Soviet worldview. The chapter argues that Chinese scholars and diplomats viewed international law as a Western imperial tool and used sovereignty “as a shield” (pp. 153, 158) against imperialism. The PRC’s understanding of the international order in this period was succinctly expressed in the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence. This understanding was reflected prominently in the PRC’s reaction to the international recognition of the PRC as well as its stance on national reunification concerning Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Macao. 8. Chapter 6 illustrates that in the course of the past three decades (the fifth phase, from 1989 to the present), the ideological approach toward international law was dismissed and replaced by an approach centered on national interest. China continues to defend the relevance and significance of sovereignty, but is more “heterogeneous” (p. 190) in its understanding and use of the concept. China is “inflexible” (p. 205) with regard to territorial sovereignty but is willing to compromise on, for instance, economic issues related to sovereignty. Now a great supporter of globalization, the PRC has changed from a denier to a defender and reformist of international law. 9. Through this chronological study of the thinking of representative Chinese intellectuals, Carrai’s book traces the development of the concept of sovereignty in the country and presents a clear picture of how the discourse on sovereignty in China has evolved. The book’s overall conclusion is that a genealogy of the concept of sovereignty in China can neither explain the country’s current position, nor predict its future stance, because China in general adopts a “pragmatic approach” (p. 223) toward international law and sovereignty, adjusting the country’s position according to the prevailing situation at any given time. 10. Written by a sinologist and political scientist who has a strong interest in conceptual history and the history of international law, the book takes historical and Chinese perspectives, with a specific focus on the conceptual aspect. A distinctive strength of the book is that it neither endorses the Eurocentric view of international law, nor falls into a center-and-periphery narrative; instead, it allows for an alternative “ethic of Orientalism” (p. 23). Carrai rejects the Hegelian teleological philosophy of history popular in the West and shows genuine respect for the status of China as a legitimate subject in history and in the international system. 11. Nonetheless, the book has weaknesses too. First, the author declares her intention to answer two main questions: one is “how China’s new sovereign identity came about” and the other is “[how China] could take different trajectories in the future that depart from the current support of absolute sovereignty” (p. 23). Yet she addresses mainly the first question, touching only briefly upon the second one (pp. 215-217; 223-226). It is disappointing to find that after such a thorough study of the conceptual evolution of sovereignty in China, Carrai refrains from making in-depth comments on its possible future development; she seems to leave this demanding task to the readers. Second, certain issues are not adequately addressed. For instance, the author refers to the South China Sea arbitration to exemplify China’s rigid position of absolute territorial sovereignty (p. 196). Yet she fails to raise such deep questions as: Has any other State presented a “non-rigid” position of non-absolute territorial sovereignty in such a situation? How has its understanding of sovereignty guided China’s attitude in the case? What could be the implications of the case for the future development of China’s stance on international law and China’s perception of sovereignty? 12. Carrai’s Sovereignty in China: A Genealogy of a Concept Since 1840 provides, for the very first time, a history of China’s perception of sovereignty. The book is well-researched, well-written; and the author has consulted a plethora of Chinese sources. It is a must-read for anyone interested in the modern history of Chinese international relations and international law. These days, in a context of “profound changes unseen in a century”, China is constantly facing the question of how to adjust its stance on State sovereignty and international law. If one needs to look back into history in order to look forward into the future, then Carrai’s book provides invaluable food for thought. The lingering question for China is: What lessons can we learn from history? © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/open_access/funder_policies/chorus/standard_publication_model)
TI - Maria Adele Carrai, Sovereignty in China: A Genealogy of a Concept Since 1840
JF - Chinese Journal of International Law
DO - 10.1093/chinesejil/jmaa039
DA - 2021-03-04
UR - https://www.deepdyve.com/lp/oxford-university-press/maria-adele-carrai-sovereignty-in-china-a-genealogy-of-a-concept-since-MBK2uZKXW0
SP - 1
EP - 1
VL - Advance Article
IS - 
DP - DeepDyve
ER -