Propuesta

The construct of the China Dream has been one of the most notable constructs in the Chinese discourse on China’s engagement with Sudan. This is largely since the degree of Chinese involvement with Sudan has been a recent development in Chinese foreign policy which is reflective of China’s growing confidence on the international stage as well as the increasingly exceptionalist stance taken by Beijing in recent years (Callahan, 2012, pg. 11). It was also expected that the presence of this construct in the Chinese narrative illustrates how Chinese foreign policy is more than the largely mercenary venture that the Anglophone literature has often portrayed it as. This suggests an evolution of Chinese foreign policy in recent years between the administrations of Hu and Xi. In keeping with the more recent developments in Chinese foreign policy, it is fitting that the notion of the China Dream has been one of the notable constructs in the Chinese discourse of China’s policies towards Sudan. This notion has become particularly notable in the years after 2012 with the increased advocacy of this concept by Xi’s premiership (Liu, 2015, pg. 16), which was further reinforced by the nineteenth Party Congress in 2017.

One of the notable manifestations of this construct has been the conflation of the China Dream with the aspirations of Sudan, as symbolised by the ideal of the ‘Sudanese Dream’. An example of this conflation can be seen in the claim of the Chinese ambassador, Luo Xiaoguang in a speech on the 64th anniversary of the founding of the PRC, that the Chinese Dream is ‘closely linked with the dreams of other peoples around the world’. This intended to depict China as a partner for Sudan rather than an exploiter of the country as claimed in the American discourse on this case study which is a response to the claims made about Chinese policies towards Sudan by the American narrative (Kim and Li, 2012, pg. 28).

It is also this conflation of the aims of China and Sudan that is indicative of how the Chinese discourse is symbolic of the stance of China’s foreign policy in recent years. This stance has taken a more aspirational bent as well as the increasingly exceptionalist viewpoint of it. Such a stance is in line with the Chinese discourse’s attempts to separate Chinese foreign policy in Sudan from those of the U.S. in the continent (Wang, pg. 524). While the American discourse attempts to draw parallels between Chinese foreign policy and the moves of the European

147

imperial powers, the Chinese narrative seeks to separate the two. This notion is also expected to gain further traction because of the stance of Chinese foreign policy taken by Xi.

In keeping with Xi’s vision, another purpose of this construct is to separate Chinese foreign policy from that of the United States. This can be seen in references to ‘Chinese characteristics’ and ‘Chinese solutions’. While the former statement predates the construct of the China Dream, particularly regarding the concept of ‘socialism with Chinese characteristics’, it nether the less serves the same purpose of differentiating Chinese policy and its constructs from that of the American world (Lai, 2012, pg. 85). This again serves as an illustration of the wider image that the Chinese narrative seeks to promote via its constructs of China’s African policies.

The construct of the China Dream is illustrative of the image that China seeks to portray to the wider world. This has been particularly apparent in the references to the ‘great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation’ made by several Chinese officials such as Luo Xiaoguang and Li Lianhe, with the latter claiming that:

“Chinese people are looking forward to realizing the “two centenary goals”, We are full of confidence in realizing the “Chinese Dream” of the great renewal of the Chinese nation. (Speech at the Reception Celebrating the 66th _{Anniversary of the Founding of the People’s Republic of China}

by Ambassador Li Lianhe)

The statement fit into Liu Mingfu’s concept of the China Dream, which also advocated a similar process of rejuvenation. As well as making a direct reference to Liu’s (2015, pg. 338) concept by claiming that the China Dream is the ‘Great Renewal of the Chinese nation’, which is indicative of the evolution of the Chinese vision of China’s role. This has become increasingly pronounced in the more recent section of the Chinese corpus, which reflects one of the notable changes in the Chinese discourse in the Xi era. Such an image is illustrative of how China perceives its international role as the return to the status it once held prior to the nineteenth century, as shown by further references to the ‘great renewal’ of the Chinese nation, which has been one of the core tenets of the China Dream. Alongside the construct of China as a role model, the construct of the China Dream has furthered the perception that China possesses an alternative vision, which seeks to pursue a course different from that of the West. This reflects the shifts in China’s post-Mao identity (Yan, 2010, pg. 99). Liu’s concept is further referenced, in the allusion to the ‘great renewal of the Chinese nation’. In addition, it is this reference to a ‘great renewal’ that furthers another construct of China’s role, which is the idea of China’s return rather than the rise of China, which ties into the influence of concepts

148

from China’s imperial past upon the China Dream in its attempts to chart a uniquely ‘Chinese destiny’ for China (Zhu, 2013, pg. 1).

At the same time, the construct of the China Dream is also connected to the other constructs present in the Chinese discourse. This can be seen in Luo’s assertion that:

“In Sudan, the Sudanese people also have the "Sudanese Dream" of national peace, stability and development, and the Sino-Sudan friendly cooperation is the important bridge between the "Chinese Dream" and "Sudanese Dream ". In recent years, Sino-Sudan friendly cooperation relationship of all-dimension, multi-level and wide-range has been continuously moving forward, we further enhanced political mutual trust, deepened economic and trade cooperation, continued to expand cultural exchanges.” (Speech at the Reception of the 64th _{Anniversary of National Day)}

The reference to a ‘Sudanese Dream’ in line with the construct of the Chinese Dream is also suggestive of the construct of Chinese policy in Sudan being of mutual benefit, which is evident in the reference to Sino-Sudanese cooperation being the ‘important bridge between the Chinese Dream and the Sudanese Dream’. By citing the idea of the ‘Sudanese Dream’ alongside the China Dream, the statement conflates China’s goals with those of Sudan, which illustrates an overlap with the construct of mutuality (Niu and Liu, 2016, pg. 273). This serves to unify the Chinese constructs into a single image as well as furthering China’s vision for the future of the African continent. In addition, the claim that the ‘dreams of both nations’ as being ‘mutual peace and stability’ is a continuation of the previous image of ‘China’s peaceful rise’ as well as the influence of the case study upon the form that the constructs take, with the idea of mutual peace being a reference to the conflict in the south of the country. This is expressive of China’s foreign policy stance as well as overlapping with the construct of mutual benefit, which indicates an overlap between these constructs (Zhao, 2011 pg. 67). The relationship between these two constructs is suggestive of how the images invoked by the Chinese discourse are unified to create a single coherent depiction of Chinese foreign policy. The overlap between the two constructs is also furthered by the depiction of the China Dream as being through economic development, which furthers the image of China as a role model as well as being a possible response to the common construct of the China threat, a notion that Beijing seeks to combat through the spread of Chinese constructs and norms.

Along with the utilisation of China’s experiences of economic development, the presence of the China Dream is also symbolic of the shifts in the structures of experience within the Chinese discourse as well as the changing Chinese perceptions of China’s identity. This again

149

is largely reflective of China’s desire to return to its previous identity as a role model for other states to follow, which has been a consistent construct throughout the various incarnations of the Chinese discourse, something that is furthered by Luo’s claim that China ‘sets a good example for the worldwide bilateral relation’.

In keeping with the Chinese constructs as a reflection of the developments in Chinese foreign policy, the China Dream also serves as an expression of the aspirations that China is currently pursuing. This has been reflected in the frequent references to rejuvenation within the Chinese discourse as well as how the very concept of the China Dream itself, which promotes the idea of a separate ‘Chinese’ destiny. Such a notion ties into the depiction of ‘Chinese exceptionalism’ from Callahan’s Sino Speak which is also suggestive of a move away from the initial aim of convergence with the American world. The presence of the construct of the China Dream in the case of Sudan is illustrative of several factors within the Chinese narrative as well as symbolising several wider issues within China’s foreign policy and identity. This serves as part of the construct of China’s identity and foreign policy that China seeks to promote as well as an attempt to separate Chinese policy from that of the U.S. This is also symbolic of the changes in Chinese foreign policy and identity, in this case, the rise of an increasingly aspirational and exceptionalist foreign policy under Xi’s leadership.