How to Observe International Relations under the Pandemic with a Scientific Methodology

-- A lecture byProfessor Yan Xuetong

Hosted by the Institute for China & World Studies and the School of Political Science & International Relations (SPSIR) of Tongji University, the Tongji Serial Lectures on Social Sciences No.23 was successfully held online on May 12, 2020. Professor Yan Xuetong, a senior professor of liberal arts at Tsinghua University and a member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, was invited to give a speech on the topic of "How to Observe International Relations under the Pandemic with a Scientific Methodology". This lecture was presided over by Professor Men Honghua, Dean of SPSIR and President of the Institute for China & World Studies.

Prof. Yan pointed out that scholars at home and abroad recently have varied opinions on the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on international relations, for example, Henry Kissinger said that the coronavirus pandemic would forever alter the world order. Then, how to analyze the reliability of these opinions? Respect for professional knowledge is required, and a scientific methodology must be adopted to observe international relations under the pandemic. Prof. Yan’s presentation was comprised of ten sections: definition of concepts, independent variables vs. dependent variables, the variable values of balance of power, observing the current situation of global leadership after the pandemic, the impact on the major power relations, the impact on the trend of thought in the international community, the impact on the international order, no permanent influence from the lessons of flu, and determining the time node.

About the definition of concepts, Prof. Yan pointed out that the variables need to be controlled in the analysis. For example, many people believe that the strategic competition between China and the United States is mainly due to the lack of strategic mutual trust. However, in order to analyze this proposition, we must first define the concepts of “strategic trust” and “strategic competition” and tell the difference between “degree of trust” and “suspicion”. Based on that, we are able to further analyze whether the several changes in the China-US strategic relationship has anything to do with strategic trust. It can be found that the several changes occurred in a very short period of time, but strategic trust was changing in a slower process. This indicates that strategic trust is more of an auxiliary factor, rather than playing a role in every change.

About the variable values of balance of power, Prof. Yan said that the economic strength of countries is an important factor in the international structure. The comparison of the proportions of China and the US in global economic aggregate can be used as the basis for analyzing the international structure of power. Besides, some believe that in the future, China's GDP will mainly generate from the digital economy, and the current gap between China and the US in the output value of digital economy is relatively small. In terms of the impact of the pandemic, according to the calculations by the IMF, the US, Germany, Japan and many countries saw negative GDP growth in 2020, while China and India achieved positive growth. In terms of economic aggregate, the gap between China and the US will be further narrowed. However, in order to analyze the impact of the pandemic on national strength, we must figure out what aspect is affected: economic strength, military strength or others.

Prof. Yan pointed out that in observing the current situation of global leadership, we need to make clear the concept of “leadership” and determine whether leadership exists, so that we can analyze whether leadership is rising or declining. The leader and the follower constitute a symbiotic relationship. No follower, no leader. Leadership can be divided into three types: active following (derived from authority), unforced obedience (derived from resource induction), and forced obedience (derived from power). Conditions for global leadership include: strength, will and relationship (most countries are willing to be led by a certain country), and only if these three conditions are met can leadership be constituted.

Prof. Yan also analyzed the impact of the pandemic on the major power relations. It is generally believed that the pandemic has intensified the strategic confrontation between China and the US. The US accused China of being the origins of the virus, and the Chinese government criticized US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo for being a public enemy of mankind. However, have China and the US’s relations with other major powers in the world changed? To answer this question, we need to look at the hedging policies of major powers against China and the US one by one. For example, Russia cooperates with China, but it also issued a joint statement with the US on April 25 to commemorate the 75th anniversary of the historic meeting between American and Soviet troops on the Elbe River in Germany, a move to show improvement in its relations with the US; Germany, Great Britain and France support the cooperation with China in combating COVID-19, but they also support the US investigation into the origins of the virus.

About the impact on the trends of thought in the international community, it is widely believed in the academic circles that the pandemic has accelerated the decline of liberalism and the rise of populism and nationalism. Some incidents have suggested that the pandemic has indeed had an impact on the international trends of thought and played a role in promoting some trends of thought. The pandemic has intensified people’s idea of sovereignty norms. It can be observed that it is sovereign states that are fighting the pandemic and controlling the entry and exit of personnel on a global scale. The pandemic has also exacerbated people’s dislike of globalization as they blame globalization for the outbreak of the pandemic which has worsened the polarization between the rich and the poor and made the global industrial chain insecure, etc.

In fact, globalization is a double-edged sword per se. The pandemic has severely affected the positive effects of globalization and amplified its negative effects. At the same time, the influence of ideological differences has declined. The performance of different countries in the battle against the pandemic reflects that this has no significant correlation with ideology or political system. Besides, international cooperation on epidemic prevention and control is also independent of ideology. The comparison between East Asian countries and European and American countries suggests that the obedience to leadership in East Asia’s Confucian culture has helped East Asian countries stand out in this battle.

Finally, Prof. Yan pointed out that throughout history, human beings have not been able to completely eliminate flu and war, and they always forget the lessons of the last time. We should be wary of such forgetfulness, which may lead to the next disaster. To scientifically analyze the impact of the pandemic on international relations, we must also determine the time node so that we can analyze the changes in international relations within a specific time period. For example, Kissinger said that the pandemic would forever alter the world order, but how? It is necessary to determine the time node. Prof. Yan stressed that this lecture was not intended to tell us the conclusions about the impact, but to show us the essentials in adopting a scientific methodology to observe the development trend of international relations under the pandemic.

More than 700 teachers and students from 60-plus universities at home and abroad participated in the lecture. After his presentation, Prof. Yan gave wonderful answers to their questions on scientific research methodology, the influence of Confucian culture, the linkage between non-traditional security and traditional security, the trend of China-US relations, the relationship between globalization and regional integration, China’s discourse power in the international community, and China-US-Europe relationship.

Dean Men Honghua concluded that international studies are regarded as an integration of social sciences and humanities. Prof. Yan and Prof. Wang Yizhou at Peking University are two outstanding representatives advocating the scientific methodology and the humanistic methodology, respectively. Prof. Wang once pointed out, “What China’s academia of international relations lacks or needs to improve most is the philosophical dialectical thinking and its methodology rather than specific theories, views or specialized knowledge”. At present, more and more attention has been paid to the methodology of social sciences. Many scholars have accepted such viewpoint that strict compliance with scientific methodology may not necessarily lead to high-quality research, but it is difficult to conduct high-quality research without scientific methodology. This progress is pioneered and promoted by Prof. Yan. Dean Men further commented that this high-quality lecture adopted a scientific methodology to observe international relations and China's activities under the pandemic, and put forward many innovative ideas and punch lines, which was worthy of our in-depth thinking. According to incomplete statistics, more than 700 scholars and students from 59 domestic and foreign institutions, including deans of many schools of international studies at home and abroad, joined the lecture and asked more than 100 questions. The online lecture was a success beyond expectation.

After two and a half hours of wonderful presentation and Q&A interaction, the lecture came to a successful conclusion.