A Comparative Analysis of Chinese and American National Security Concepts

A Comparative Analysis of Chinese and American National Security Concepts

Prof. Yin Jiwu*

The security concept is a systematic presentation of national security concepts. Analyzing the differences in the national security concepts of China and the United States helps link to promote mutual understanding between them and increases the effectiveness of strategic communication. Judging each other’s strategic intentions and actions has become the key element in the national security views of both China and the United States’ national security views. The national security views of China and the United States are based on how the state of their relationship and their judgments of how that relationship might develop. For the United States, national security is based on a “security threat” paradigm while for China it is based on the “national security state” paradigm. In terms of security dimension, security differentiation thinking, security measures, security value there are systematic differences between the national security views of China and the United States. Behind this are other differences: aspects of cultural background, political basis, and implementation mechanisms that create difficult obstacles. Understanding these differences between the Chinese and American countries’ views on security and their causes can help avoid mistakes in strategic communication between China and the United States and enhance security cooperation between the two sides.

Keywords:national security concept, strategic communication, security status, security threat


Yin Jiwu is Professor in the School of International Relations, Renmin University of China

Originally published in: China Social Sciences Network (Editor: Chen Qian)

Sourced from David Cowhig’s translation: https://gaodawei.wordpress.com/2020/07/14/prc-scholar-yin-jiwu-comparing-us-and-prc-concepts-of-national-security/

Chinese text: www.cssn.cn/gjgxx/gj_ttxw/202007/t20200706_5151601.shtml?COLLCC=3089307656&COLLCC=2837312483&

* The opinions expressed in this article are the author's own and do not reflect the official policy, position or view of the Romanian Institute for Europe-Asia Studies - IRSEA or any of its partners.