3 Analysis of President Joseph Biden’s Strategic Views on National Security

ZHU Chenge and YIN Jiwu

[Abstract] Political leaders’ strategic views on national security define their countries’strategic narratives and contribute to the making and implementation of national security strategies.To be more specific, their strategic thinking about security,strategic tactics and beliefs, as well as strategic capacity to mobilize, are the main determinants of how the national security strategy is made and implemented.Different degrees of structural constraints on political leaders and diverse strategic situations they are facing constitute important factors affecting their capabilities to shape national security strategies.Holding a negative perception of America’s national security environment, President Biden tends to identify the so-called revisionist countries that aim to change the “status quo” and global security issues as major sources of threat to the US national security.Therefore, the US strives to achieve its priority goals in the fields of security, ideology, and economy and trade by means of values diplomacy, post-emptive measures and multilateral cooperation.Owing to his core position in the strategic agenda-setting and the US security policy architecture,President Biden has been able to effectively implement and export his own strategic concepts in a complex internal and external environment.This paper has verified the argument that political leaders’ personal vision plays an extremely important role in making and implementing national security strategy by examining Biden’s perception of Russia and China as a threat.Systematic analyses of President Biden’s national security view will shed new light on the understanding of the US foreign policy,national security strategy, and the future development of Sino-US relations.

[Keywords] Joseph Biden, national security view, strategic decision-making mentality,US diplomacy and strategy

34 Alliance Management in the Unification and Rising Periods of China’s Ancient History: Experiences and Inspirations

MENG Weizhan

[Abstract] The glorious rise of a dynasty in China’s history could often be attributed to its effective alliance management.Historically, the nomadic tribes in northwest China frequently constituted a hindrance and security threat to the rise of Chinese ancient dynasties.In order to secure their dominance in the East Asian international system and establish a stable and lasting tributary system, Chinese ancient dynasties tended to choose to unite some of the tribes in their efforts to defeat those that were considered a threat to them.The essence of the Jimi system (羈縻制) and tributary system lies in mutual security support between the Middle Kingdom and nomadic tribes.Different from today’s alliance system of the United States that is based on the assimilation of values, the alliance systems established by the unified dynasties in ancient China were based on the observance of moral principles and ethical codes,which include keeping promises, being prudent in waging wars and putting oneself in others’ shoes.On the one hand, Chinese ancient dynasties tended to abide by the security commitment given to their neighboring allies.On the other hand, they tried not to use force to resolve problems with those who had undermined regional peace,but to reconcile conflicts of interests and find a long-term agreement on how to coexist with their neighbors in the region.When those options failed, they chose to unite their allies to destroy the main enemies.The Tang Dynasty, one of the most powerful dynasties in ancient China, forged the most successful alliance system in China’s history by establishing the Jimi system with various actors in Inner Asia and on the Korean Peninsula to ensure stability and security of its frontiers.Similarly, the Han Dynasty, Ming Dynasty and Qing Dynasty all achieved political security and unity through alliance management, and then promoted their status in the international system, which is a rule that applies to almost every period of Chinese history.Studying the management experiences of Chinese ancient dynasties on their alliance systems will be of great enlightenment on and reference significance to China’s national security today.

[Keywords] ancient China, alliance, national security, tributary system, China’s rise,Tang Dynasty

[Author] MENG Weizhan, Lecturer, Institute for Advanced Study in Social Sciences,Fudan University (Shanghai, 200433).

61 Model Hypothesis of National Security Governance under the“Situation-Consciousness-Action” Framework

YANG Huafeng

[Abstract] The complexity and uncertainty of national security risks put forward increasing demands for a more efficient governance system and greater governance capabilities.Synergy concepts of the governance theory pedigree and the “active voice”of security theories meet the practical needs of national security affairs.On the conceptual dimension of “security, sense of security and securitization”, a “situationconsciousness-action” analytical framework has been established to examine security status, security perceptions and security actions.The objects, concepts and policy actions of the national security governance system are just embedded in the interactive construction process between the above mentioned three elements.Firstly, in discussions about the identification and threshold range of the objects of security governance, the boundary of public affairs being put into the security agenda is characterized by “critical point elasticity” due to the difference relationship between security and risk as well as the dynamic equilibrium relationship between politicization and securitization.Secondly, under the dominant government paradigm,subjects of security governance present a security concept pattern featuring“ability＞status＞perception” and show “sequence preference” in the supply of security order and security services.Third, in the policy-making process of security governance, the inverted triangle structure consisting of policy environment, policy awareness and policy choice forms the upper end of the governance hourglass, while the hierarchical triangle structure made up of political parties, government and society forms the lower end of the governance hourglass.The former presents a funnel effect with the top-down dripping of information flow, resource flow and power flow.The latter, along with the multi-layered transmission of policy implementation, sometimes takes on such bureaucratic effects as increased transfer, target deviation and reactive governance, which forms the “hourglass-model” of governance action.

MATCH-AT模塊無須內(nèi)定向，經(jīng)過相對定向和絕對定向，輸出PATB格式的加密成果，利用INPHO空三成果格式轉(zhuǎn)換工具進(jìn)行成果輸出，能導(dǎo)入JX-4和GeoStereo等航測立體測圖軟件上建立立體模型加密成果。

[Keywords] national security governance, “situation-consciousness-action” analytical framework, critical point elasticity, sequence preference, hourglass model

[Author] YANG Huafeng, Ph.D.and Professor, Department of Public Administration,University of International Relations (Beijing, 100091).

86 Policy Recommendations for the US Government Regarding the“No-First-Use” of Nuclear Weapons: Origin and Evolution

LU Yin

[Abstract] The policy of “no-first-use” of nuclear weapons means that a nuclearweapon state should strictly limit the role of its nuclear weapons in nuclear deterrence,publicly renounce the first use of nuclear weapons, and use nuclear weapons only for nuclear retaliation (nuclear counterattack).From the Cold War to the present day, the United States has been making theoretical explorations on the issue of “no-first-use”of nuclear weapons.Both proponents and opponents have made their case from perspectives of realism, liberalism and constructivism.There have also been recommendations within the US government regarding the adoption of no-first-use policy, but the US has not formally declared that it would never use nuclear weapons first.Factors that hinder the US government from adopting such a policy include the shackles of the mindset, limitations of political tools, inherent contradictions in strategic preparedness for nuclear warfare, and constant pressure from its allies.Given the current security environment, it is unlikely that the United States will officially declare the adoption of a “no-first-use” policy in the foreseeable future.Nevertheless,the “no-first-use” policy recommendations will continue to affect the decision-making process of the US government because of the willingness of major powers to avoid nuclear warfare and maintain strategic stability.The recommendations have also expressed security concerns of non-nuclear-weapon countries over possible nuclear miscalculations and crises.The adoption of “no-first-use” policy will absolutely help enhance strategic mutual trust, preserve global peace and strategic stability, and safeguard the common well-being of human society.

[Keywords] US nuclear policy, “no first use”, nuclear weapons, policy proposal,major resistance factors

[Author] LU Yin, Associate Professor, National Security College, National Defense University (Beijing, 100091).

113 Beyond Biodefense: “Dual-Use” Security Narrative and Evolution of US Biotechnology Policies

DING Di

[Abstract] Biotechnology has been both a tremendous catalyst and a potential risk for the advancement of human society due to its “dual-use” nature.Ever since 9/11 terrorist attacks, the US government has been working on its discourse manipulation of the “dual-use” concept in the field of biotechnology, which not only contributed to the final formation of a unique security narrative, but also accelerated the evolution of US biotechnology policies.From the Bush administration to the Biden administration, biotechnology under the “dual-use” security narrative has generated multiple security effects and developed both defensive and competitive objectives in the field of biotechnology policies.Theoretically, there is an obvious contradiction between the defensive and competitive objectives, which highlights the fact that Washington’s hegemonic logic has eroded its rational policy making against the backdrop of great power competition.Practically, US biotechnology policies have gone beyond its biodefense strategy with an attempt to “decouple” scientific research from that of America’s competitors and strengthen militarized investment so as to suppress America’s competitors and maintain its leading position in biotechnology.As is known to all, the development of emerging biotechnology contributes to globalization and benefits all humanity.The policies and actions based on US hegemonic logic is against the law of science and technology development, and may“backfire” and exert severe and negative impacts on the development of US biotechnology itself as well as global biosecurity.

[Keywords] biosecurity, security narratives, US hegemony, dual use, biotechnology

[Author] DING Di, Associate Researcher, Institute for China and World Studies,Tongji University; Ph.D.Student, School of Political Science and International Relations, Tongji University (Shanghai, 200092).