A Comparative Analysis of China's New Era Economic Diplomacy and the Economic Diplomacy Strategy of the Biden Administration

Jiali Huang

doi:10.71113/JMSS.v2i2.257

Authors

Jiali Huang Shanghai Institutes for International Studies

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71113/JMSS.v2i2.257

Keywords:

Economic Diplomacy; Sino-US Relations; Great Power Competition

Abstract

Against the backdrop of intensifying Sino-US strategic competition, the Biden administration's economic diplomacy exhibits a pronounced inclination toward exclusive minilateralism. At the global level, it advocates the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII), while at the regional level, it establishes the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF) to collectively counter China's developmental advantages and form exclusive, targeted economic alliances. In contrast, China's economic diplomacy in the new era is guided by the principles of inclusivity and open multilateralism. Globally, it actively promotes the concept of a community with a shared future for mankind and the Global Development Initiative (GDI), fostering inclusive and equitable development across nations. Concurrently, China continues to expand the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), transforming it from a regional cooperation platform into a globally recognized public good that facilitates pragmatic development. A comparative analysis of the economic diplomacy approaches of the two countries facilitates a clearer understanding of the divergent pathways of Sino-US economic development and external cooperation under complex geopolitical conditions, while also providing insights into the evolving trajectory of their economic diplomacy amid great power competition.

References

[1]1.Xu, J. H. (2016). Economic diplomacy: Concept and characteristics analysis. Shenzhen University Journal (Humanities and Social Sciences Edition), 33(5), 78–83.

[2]Lee, D., & Hocking, B. (2018). Economic diplomacy. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. https://oxfordre.com/internationalstudies/view/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.001.0001/acrefore-9780190846626-e-384.

[3]Li, W. (2022). China’s economic diplomacy in the past ten years. New Finance (Government Finance), (11), 14–17.

[4]Wang, Z. M. (2024). Minilateralism, U.S.-style alliances, and their impact on multilateral economic governance mechanisms. Pacific Journal, 32(1), 57–71. https://doi.org/10.14015/j.cnki.1004-8049.2024.01.005

[5]The White House. (2023). Fact sheet: Partnership for global infrastructure and investment at the G7 Summit. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2023/05/20/fact-sheet-partnership-for-global-infrastructure-and-investment-at-the-g7-summit/

[6]The White House. (2021). Fact sheet: President Biden and G7 leaders launch Build Back Better World (B3W) partnership. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/06/12/fact-sheet-president-biden-and-g7-leaders-launch-build-back-better-world-b3w-partnership/

[7]Kenny, C. (2022). Biden’s foreign aid is funding the Washington bubble. Foreign Policy. https://foreignpolicy.com/2022/05/06/us-foreign-aid-biden-build-back-better-world-development/

[8]Li, W. (2022). Biden administration’s economic diplomacy strategy and its prospects. Contemporary World, (12), 43–47.

[9]Yao, S. (2022). The intention and prospects of the “Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment.” World Affairs, (15), 54–55.

[10]Center for a New American Security. (2022). CNAS responds: Unpacking the G7 and NATO summits. https://www.cnas.org/press/press-note/cnas-responds-unpacking-the-g7-and-nato-summits

[11]Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. (2022). Foreign Ministry responds to G7’s new infrastructure initiative. https://www.mfa.gov.cn/web/sp_683685/wjbfyrlxjzh_683691/202206/t20220627_10710609.shtml

[12]The White House. (2022). Fact sheet: In Asia, President Biden and a dozen Indo-Pacific partners launch the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity. https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2022/05/23/fact-sheet-in-asia-president-biden-and-a-dozen-indo-pacific-partners-launch-the-indo-pacific-economic-framework-for-prosperity/

[13]Zhang, L. (2022). The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework under the extension of the U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategy. China Foreign Exchange, (12), 74–75. https://doi.org/10.13539/j.cnki.11-5475/f.2022.12.026

[14]Baldwin, R., & Lopez‐Gonzalez, J. (2015). Supply-chain trade: A portrait of global patterns and several testable hypotheses. The World Economy, 38(11), 1682–1721.

[15]Zhang, T. (2024). New developments of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and its impact on Asia-Pacific regional economic integration. International Forum, 26(4), 137–154, 160. https://doi.org/10.13549/j.cnki.cn11-3959/d.2024.04.008

[16]Chang, L. (2024). Characteristics, trends, and China’s response to the supply chain agreement in the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. Journal of Shanghai University of International Business and Economics, 31(3), 5–16, 88. https://doi.org/10.16060/j.cnki.issn2095-8072.2024.03.001

[17]Jiang, F. (2022). The Biden administration’s Indo-Pacific Economic Framework and its impact. Journal of American Studies, 2022(2), 33–49, 279.

[18]People’s Daily. (2012). The CPC first proposed the "community of shared future for mankind" advocating peace, development, and common prosperity. http://cpc.people.com.cn/18/n/2012/1111/c350825-19539441.html

[19]Qu, X. (2013). The value-based foundation of the community of shared future for mankind. Qiushi, (4), 53–55.

[20]Xinhua News Agency. (2022). The concept of a community of shared future for mankind written into three UNGA first committee resolutions. http://www.news.cn/world/2022-11/04/c_1129100929.htm

[21]Xinhua News Agency. (2021). Xi Jinping proposes the global development initiative. http://www.xinhuanet.com/2021-09/22/c_1127886748.htm

[22]Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China. (2023). Global development initiative implementation progress report 2023. https://www.mfa.gov.cn/web/wjb_673085/zzjg_673183/gjjjs_674249/xgxw_674251/202306/P020230620670372006993.pdf

[23]Yin, W., & Xiang, Y. (2023). The shared values for all mankind: The value-based foundation for constructing a community of shared future for mankind. Journal of Xinjiang University (Philosophy and Social Sciences Edition), 51(1), 56–61. https://doi.org/10.13568/j.cnki.issn1000-2820.2023.01.007

[24]International Finance Forum. (2023). 2023 global finance and development report. http://upload.iff.org.cn/uploads/report/IFF-Global-Finance-and-Development-Report-2023-cn20231023.pdf

[25]Belt and Road Portal. (2023). What is the “Belt and Road”? Retrieved from https://www.yidaiyilu.gov.cn/ztindex.htm

[26]State Council of the People’s Republic of China. (2015). Three ministries jointly release the vision and actions for promoting the co-building of the “Belt and Road.” Retrieved from https://www.gov.cn/xinwen/2015-03/28/content_2839723.htm

[27]State Council of the People’s Republic of China. (2023). China has signed cooperation documents on co-building the “Belt and Road” with 152 countries and 32 international organizations. Retrieved from https://www.gov.cn/lianbo/bumen/202308/content_6899977.htm

[28]Council on Foreign Relations. (2022). Belt and Road Tracker. Retrieved from https://www.cfr.org/article/belt-and-road-tracker