Document Type : Original Article
Authors
1 Assistant Professor, Department of Political Science, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
2 Ph.D., Department of Political Science, University of Guilan, Rasht, Iran.
Abstract
Introduction
The post-Cold War international landscape has been marked by the remarkable rise of China and its integration into the global order. While this phenomenon has been widely analyzed through the lens of Western international relations (IR) theories, these frameworks often fall short in fully explaining China’s civilizational approach and normative behavior in global affairs. Rooted in European geopolitical experiences, mainstream IR theories largely ignore the unique historical, philosophical, and cultural foundations of non-Western societies. China, as a civilizational state, approaches global engagement from a different ontological and ethical standpoint. This paper aims to explore how Chinese IR theories—distinct from Western realism and liberalism—interpret China’s rise not as a threat but as a morally legitimate and harmonious process. Following the post-Mao transition, especially since the 14th Communist Party Congress in 1992, Chinese scholars have increasingly developed indigenous IR theories that combine traditional Chinese philosophies, such as Confucianism, with critical and post-Western theoretical orientations. The central research question is: How do Chinese IR theories conceptualize and legitimize China’s rise as a great power? The main hypothesis suggests that Chinese IR theorists emphasize harmony, moral authority, and peaceful development, drawing from Confucian ideals and the notion of Tianxia (All Under Heaven), thereby challenging the power-centric views of dominant Western IR paradigms
Literature Review
Scholarly interpretations of China’s rise can be grouped into three major theoretical perspectives. Realist thinkers such as Mearsheimer (2001) warn that China’s growing power will provoke instability and hegemonic rivalry. Liberal theorists argue instead that deep economic interdependence can mitigate conflict and promote cooperation (Ikenberry, 2011). In contrast, Chinese IR theorists present a culturally rooted and non-adversarial model. Qin Yaqing (2009) advocates a relational theory emphasizing process and harmony over fixed interests and zero-sum competition. Zhao Tingyang (2006) reinvigorates the ancient Chinese concept of Tianxia, envisioning a world system based on moral order and inclusive governance. These perspectives are closely aligned with postcolonial critiques of epistemic hegemony in IR theory (Acharya & Buzan, 2010), and they call for a pluralistic theoretical landscape that accommodates civilizational diversity and alternative sources of international legitimacy.
Methodology
This research employs an explanatory-analytical methodology grounded in the Tianxia system theoretical framework. Tianxia, meaning "all under the sky," is one of the most fundamental concepts in Chinese political thought. This concept has three different meanings: 1- all under the sky as a territorial element, 2- a common choice as a normative element, and 3- a global institution. In the Tianxia system, a governance model prevails that emphasizes military attraction rather than military deterrence. In other words, it replaces the benefits of cooperation with military power and an order based on dominance and superiority. Thus, in the Tianxia system, member states emphasized security, common order, and the protection of member interests.
. The study analyzes key texts by leading Chinese IR scholars and institutions to uncover how China's rise is framed within indigenous theoretical constructs. Through comparative analysis, the paper juxtaposes Chinese IR thought with mainstream Western paradigms to evaluate their underlying assumptions and strategic implications. By drawing from primary sources and Chinese intellectual traditions, the study seeks to offer a deeper and context-sensitive understanding of how Chinese scholars legitimize their country’s evolving global role.
Results
The results reveal that Chinese IR theories regard the rise of China not as a revisionist or destabilizing force but as a historically and morally grounded phenomenon. Chinese scholars view their country’s growing power as a return to its rightful place in the global hierarchy rather than a challenge to international order. Concepts such as harmonious development, benevolent hegemony, and Tianxia are central to this narrative.
These theories stress the significance of soft power, cultural diplomacy, and participation in multilateral institutions as tools for fostering a peaceful and stable international environment. Rather than prioritizing dominance or confrontation, Chinese IR theorists emphasize moral legitimacy, ethical statecraft, and a commitment to global harmony. The theories also underscore China's interest in reshaping global norms through constructive engagement rather than violent disruption. Such perspectives offer a sharp contrast to the threat-oriented interpretations prevalent in Western realist discourse.
Discussion
The discourse on China’s rise has been largely dominated by Western IR theories that frame power transitions through the lens of conflict and systemic insecurity. Realism predicts that as China grows, it will seek to challenge the existing hegemon, resulting in inevitable tensions. However, this view is increasingly contested by Chinese IR theorists who offer a fundamentally different interpretation. Grounded in philosophical traditions such as Confucianism and Daoism, Chinese IR theory emphasizes relationality, moral order, and the pursuit of harmony over competition. The Confucian ideal of wang dao (humane authority) provides an ethical basis for leadership, contrasting with the coercive logic of Western hegemony. The concept of Tianxia envisions a global order based on cultural inclusivity and mutual respect, where power is exercised not through domination but through virtue and consensus. From a postcolonial standpoint, Chinese IR theory represents an act of epistemic resistance to the universalist claims of Western modernity. It aligns with the broader Global South’s effort to decolonize knowledge and articulate indigenous visions of international relations. Moreover, China’s behavior in global forums—its emphasis on non-intervention, support for South-South cooperation, and its investment in multilateral institutions like the AIIB and BRICS—reflects the strategic application of these normative ideals. Nonetheless, critiques remain. Some scholars argue that these theories are more prescriptive than predictive and may serve as instruments of soft power rather than rigorous scientific frameworks. Others question whether China’s actual foreign policy behavior fully aligns with its theoretical propositions. Still, Chinese IR theory offers a compelling alternative for rethinking power, identity, and legitimacy in global politics. It opens up the possibility of a more pluralistic IR scholarship that is not only more inclusive but also more reflective of the evolving structure of the international syste.
Conclusion
This paper concludes that Chinese international relations theories constitute a significant epistemological and normative departure from mainstream Western paradigms. By integrating Confucian ethics, civilizational identity, and historical continuity, these theories provide a culturally resonant framework for understanding China’s peaceful rise. Unlike realism and liberalism, which often perceive rising powers as threats or competitors, Chinese theories frame power as a moral responsibility aimed at fostering harmony and shared development. The Confucian concept of “benevolent hegemony” redefines leadership as relational rather than hierarchical. Chinese IR theory also contributes to the broader postcolonial project of challenging Western intellectual hegemony and reclaiming space for indigenous knowledge systems. While these theories face ongoing scrutiny regarding their practical relevance and global acceptance, they offer a valuable lens for interpreting China’s strategic posture and its vision for international order. Ultimately, embracing theoretical pluralism in IR not only enhances the discipline’s analytical capacity but also affirms the legitimacy of diverse worldviews in shaping the future of global politics. As China continues to grow and engage with the world, its evolving IR theories may increasingly influence how states conceptualize power, authority, and cooperation in the 21st century.
Keywords
Main Subjects
)