Over the years, this author has been involved in the ‘Chinese school of International Relations (IR)’ debate. In this article I try to reflect on these discussions or debates from which some insights can be retrieved to inform future research and further growth of a Chinese School of IR. Should a Chinese school be set as the goal? If so, how should this be pursued? This debate and the relevant efforts have proved to be a promising movement in the Chinese IR community, demonstrating that a Chinese school of IR is inevitable and it actually is evolving. A theory is a generalization or cluster of generalizations. This article argues that from the ‘Tsinghua approach’, a ‘moral realism’ has sprung up. Qin Yaqin’s theorizing is centered around relationality and has been productive. A theory of symbiosis in the world community is being developed by a group of Shanghai-based scholars, and a ‘symbiosis school’ has grown up. Overall, four distinct theories of Chinese origins, i.e., relational theory, moral realism, tianxia theory and gongsheng/symbiotic theory, have appeared. Thus, IR theory-building in China in the first two decades of the 21st century has rendered the question ‘why there is no IR theory in China’ obsolete.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ren Xiao (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: