Youth Reflections: Regional and Country Studies: A Comparative Reading of Two Introductory Essay Collections (Huang Zeyi)

Regional and Country Studies: A Comparative Reading of Two Introductory Proceedings

Author/Huang Zeyi

Trainees of the 13th Grand Diplomacy Youth Development and Practice Sailing Project Class

Studied in the Spanish Experimental Course of Law at China University of Political Science and Law

Source: Grand Diplomacy Youth Think Tank (GDYT)

Editor's note: This article is a reflection on the study and practice of the 13th Grand Diplomacy Youth Development and Practice Navigation Project Class of the Grand Diplomacy Youth Think Tank (GDYT).

First output

This comparative reading and post-reading writing task is the third task of the project class after reading two introductory works on regional and country studies, and it is also the first output task. Referring to the "standard requirements" put forward by Dean Wang Gaigai, in order to make some thoughts on the "layout of the text" and "the perspective of observation", the style structure of the thematic interviews of the two books is specially imitated, and the text is as follows.

As a "post-reading feeling", this paper adheres to the dual perspectives of "reading" (summarizing what has been learned) and "feeling" (reviewing the reading experience) in the output process.

Comparison of the two books

The object of this comparative reading is two collections of regional and country studies compiled by the teachers of Peking University and the teachers of International Politics Studies, hereinafter referred to as the "Green Book" and the "Blue Book", collectively referred to as the "Two Books".

As far as the "similarity" of the two books is concerned, first of all, the readership and basic purpose are the same, and they are both aimed at a wide range of beginners to senior researchers, and introduce the basic situation of the discipline of regional and country studies and the current situation of mainland studies. This also leads to another "similarity" between the two books: in the form of expert interviews and anthologies, they form short, concise and interconnected short stories, taking into account the sense of system, interest and reading difficulty in the reading process of beginner readers. Although the author obviously does not have such attainments, he can still feel the hazy picture of the future trend of mainland regional country studies and the concern and confidence of the academic community in the development of the discipline from the dialogues between the interviewers and the interviewees, the writings of the authors, and even the wordless arrangements of the editor-in-chief. I believe that professionals with many years of experience in academic research will have a clearer and stronger feeling.

The dialectic of "sameness" is "difference". First of all, there are differences in specific purposes and perspectives, and the subtitle of the "Green Book" emphasizes that its practices and cases come from Peking University's exploration of discipline construction and regional and country studies, and directly introduces or indirectly reflects this exploration. The "Blue Book" is the perspective of the editors of International Politics Studies and scholars of domestic and international relations and international politics on regional and country studies, especially the construction of mainland disciplines. However, it cannot be said that the latter is more "general": the former generally takes into account the mainland beyond national borders, but focuses on the experience of Peking University in specific cases; the latter mainly reflects the situation of the academic community in the mainland, and the specific examples cover a wide range of major domestic universities. Further differences are also reflected in the arrangement system and the reading experience it brings to readers: the "Green Book" is more theoretical (the most intuitively, it arranges a secondary catalog, with four themes: discipline construction, theoretical methods, talent training and specific cases), while the "Blue Book" arranges the eight articles after the overall perspective of Ren Xiao and Niu Ke to each adopt a specific country or region perspective, focusing on the main line of the mainland perspective to pursue "scattered form but not dispersed" to the greatest extent.

Triple cognition

The comparison of the two books in the previous article is mainly formal, but in this section the two books are discussed together as introductory works for the study of mainland regional countries. In writing this part, the author mainly recalls the content of the reading experience, and downplays the formal factors such as whether I was reading the "green book" or the "blue book" at that time. Through reading the two books, my understanding of regional country studies mainly includes the following three aspects, which are the main contents that I hope to output in this paper:

(1) Discipline independence: the difference between disciplines and other disciplines

The connotation of the discipline is essentially a theoretical problem, which is the foundation to highlight the independent value of the discipline, and provides guidance for research activities and talent training. The mainland's division of regional country studies into first-level disciplines is more out of practical than theoretical needs, so it is logically inappropriate to use it as evidence of disciplinary independence to reverse cause and effect, and the academic community should instead answer whether this arrangement also has a certain theoretical basis. Mr. Qian Chengdan's view has a strong explanatory power: regional and country studies is a multidisciplinary and interdisciplinary field, which is interdisciplinary. The purpose, attributes, and functional needs of this intersection constitute the justification for the ambiguity of disciplinary boundaries. Thus, this unique ambiguity is no longer a reason to question its independent status, but rather a feature of the independent disciplines that distinguish and intersect regional country studies.

However, there are of course essential differences, especially at the methodological level. In the face of the trend of standardization of political science methodology highlighted around the 70s of the 20th century, regional studies adopted three responses: rejecting quantitative methods, adopting new regional division standards with weak political characteristics such as geography and economy, and criticizing the research agenda of "comparative regional studies" in political science, so that the two "diverged ways" methodologically and "decoupled" more thoroughly. Professor Ren Xiao pointed out that the internal and external aspects of regional country studies and international relations studies, as well as the explanatory and exploratory nature of phenomena in theoretical purposes, and that the intersection of the research objects and fields of the two arises in the field of foreign policy. Prof. Wang Jisi also noticed that regional and country studies seek a delicate balance between the humanities and social sciences, and implicitly put forward the myth of "the study of diplomacy in American studies" or "the study of American studies in diplomacy".

Although Prof. Wang did not directly answer this question, there are two enlightenments for the author of the articles of Prof. Wang and other teachers: first, it is undoubtedly more important for regional and country studies to emphasize this balance than related independent disciplines, and second, for the two inseparable disciplines, the discussion of their independence should be limited to the disciplines themselves, and the researchers and research results can be shared by the two disciplines, and there is no need to dogmatically insist that the disciplines belong.

(2) Discipline History: Global and China

In addition to the intersection of attributes, another important feature of regional and country studies is that it serves the country's foreign relations in terms of purpose, and its disciplinary history clearly reflects this characteristic. At that time, the objective reality that the West was in an advanced position in the field of science laid the basic conditions for the birth of regional country studies in the West, but the needs of Western colonial activities were the more direct and realistic background of needs.

Since its birth, the study of regional and country studies has implied the perspectives of extraterritorial and foreign studies, studies of backward countries and regions, and studies of colonies that were needed by colonists out of exploitation and rule. With the collapse of the colonial system in the last century, regional country studies have washed away the color of colonialism, but this has not affected the discipline function of guiding the country's foreign exchanges. In the context of modern diplomacy, economic and trade cooperation, and other forms of international exchanges that are at least peaceful and more formally fair and just, regional country studies have turned to serve the purpose of peace, and of course, to take into account the purposes of competition, confrontation and even war.

However, the above-mentioned activities are still an actual and potential form of international interaction, and they are very far-reaching forms, and the service objects of regional country studies include them that are in line with the nature of the discipline and the reality of the international community. In this sense, idealism does not work, and the study of contradictions can help to prevent, control and resolve contradictions.

(3) Discipline education: academic pattern and talent training

The understanding of a discipline is inseparable from the understanding of the nationally and internationally renowned universities and influential scholars of the discipline. Reading the introduction of the history and achievements of discipline construction in mainland China in the two books has enhanced the author's understanding of the current academic pattern in China: many universities and independent scientific research institutes have jointly established a system of academic research institutions with "full regional coverage and basic national coverage" from mainland China to today. The specific institutions will not be listed here.

Interestingly, the author found little overlap among the editors-in-chief and interviewers of the two books, which also reflects the enrichment of the high-end theoretical talents in regional country studies in mainland China, which is much smaller in many countries and even in other disciplines. Further, this phenomenon makes the criticism of the "mountainism" of the mainland academic circles seem less powerful: the total number of people and the large number of sub-fields make the mainland academic circles form a kind of "decentralized democracy", which restricts the formation of a single academic authority. It is inappropriate to describe foreign academia as a pure researcher's paradise, and in fact, as far as the author's hearsay is concerned, the influence of factors outside the content of research there is even greater than that in China.

Therefore, the knowledge of well-known universities and academic circles in the discipline constitutes a general requirement for talents in various disciplines. What are the characteristic requirements for regional and country research talents? When the "Green Book" calls for regional country research talents in China in the general preface, it correspondingly puts forward language requirements, experience requirements, and professional requirements for young scholars, that is, the language ability of the target country, the long-term life experience in the target country, and the specific professional academic quality. The first point is the tool basis for obtaining first-hand materials for research, and the last two points echo the practical and interdisciplinary nature of the two disciplines.

The preface of the "Green Book" also leaves room for thinking about "etc.", and the author believes that generally speaking, the introduction of knowledge and skills in the humanities and social sciences is conducive to the development of regional and national studies, and the specific direction of a scholar's specialization is a matter of personal choice. This is not only an objective reality limited by the upper limit of individual human cognitive ability, but also a respect for individual strengths and an affirmation of the value of cooperation—it is naturally reminiscent of Wang Jisi's discussion on how to balance "experts" and "generalists".

Four identities

In order to complete the reflection on the comparative reading of the two books, the author discovers his fourfold identity as a reader, and tries to raise and review the four selective questions arising from this.

First, as a beginner, is it too ambitious to read the two books or is it a lofty position? The fact that the two books are easy to understand and the relatively easy reading experience does not negate their academic nature, so it is just right for beginners to read the two books. Especially for those who are not interested in the major, it is helpful to construct a general understanding of the overall picture of the discipline without dampening their interest, and lay a good background foundation for the next specific research. The key is not to fall into complacency on the one hand, and on the other hand, to accept more systematic discipline training in one go, and to further read more professional, systematic, and targeted works.

Second, as a student of international law, should I read two books, should I talk about it as a chicken and a duck or a dialogue between disciplines? We must admit that the relationship between international law and regional and country studies is not as close as that of international relations, comparative politics, sociology, anthropology, and so on, and even the exchange of international law and international relations is an equally complicated issue. However, firstly, based on the intersectionality of regional and country studies, we should have confidence that the perspective of international law can help the research of the former; secondly, if international law researchers regard the object of research as "international issues", they can find a common discourse at the level of research objects with regional country researchers; finally, combined with the important role played by international law in global governance and the mainland's insistence and advocacy of abiding by international law, we can find a solid practical foundation for the above self-confidence.

Third, when I read the two books as a junior academic, do I read "relying on the old and selling the old" or do I have ardent expectations? We can often hear the lament of young scholars that it is "difficult to publish," and the questioning of the research ability of our academic predecessors is a topic that cannot be said but often resounds. However, it is unfair to demand the previous generation of scholars with a more mature disciplinary knowledge system and more favorable teaching conditions, and it is another unfair to evaluate the academic attainments of researchers with two introductory and introductory anthologies. What the author has read from the two books is the eloquent talk of a group of high-end experts and influential scholars in mainland and regional country studies on the nature of the discipline, the review and prospect of the discipline construction, and the real pursuit of national strategic needs, international peace and development, and human scientific progress. These are two works that are not lyrical throughout, but between the lines, young scholars and even interest lovers who stand in front of the discipline feel warm and encouraged.

Fourth, as a student of the Great Diplomatic Think Tank, is reading the two books a self-inflicted struggle or a beneficial exercise? The author had heard about and prepared for the challenge before joining the current project class, but when I first received the reading task of 100,000 words in a few days, I still felt a certain amount of difficulty. When I returned to my residence from the International Finance Corporation (IFC) headquarters in Washington, D.C., where I was interned, I had to admit that I had been tired and had the idea of "fooling" with President Wang's trust. However, on the one hand, this trust and the feeling of holding training courses cannot be disappointed, and on the other hand, it is also "self-made" to guess that the follow-up should be arranged for the output link to be tested. Therefore, the task of reading the "Green Book" and the "Blue Book" has been completed with quality and quantity, so as to complete this article, and the harvest will not be limited to this. In this sense, participating in this project class is indeed a kind of "self-helping", but why not a very beneficial exercise?

After reading the two books, the author's understanding of regional and country studies has become more in-depth, and his interest in the discipline has also changed from ignorance and yearning to more specific recognition. At the same time, I am looking forward to the follow-up tasks of the project team. (4,090 words, Washington, April 2024)

disclaimer

The views expressed in the article are personal and do not necessarily represent the views of the platform