Review: China in Central Europe. Seeking Allies, Creating Tensions by Gabriela Pleschová

Introduction

In the times of the difficult Russia-Ukraine war and rising geopolitical tensions, it is increasingly important to understand the Central-Eastern Europe, especially for the old EU members. Events such as the recent gunshot attack on Prime Minister Fico; the sudden escape to Belarus of a Polish judge responsible, among other things, for security clearances, show that the region is at the centre of rapidly changing politics. And in the middle of these turbulences, Hungary strategically shifts to developing even closer relations with China, crowned by Xi Jinping’s visit to Hungary in May 2024.

Gabriela Pleschová’s book „China in Central Europe: Seeking Allies, Creating Tensions” provides valuable insights into how post-communist countries, and EU members since 2004, navigate the complexity of their relations with China. It can be especially useful for English speakers who do not possess the linguistic competence to read Slovak, Hungarian, Czech, or Polish materials. This book is particularly beneficial for them as it offers new perspectives on the members of the Visegrad group. The Visegrad group consists of four members: Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary. I will sometimes refer to the Visegrad Groups as V4. Pleschová’s work not only addresses issues related to China but also encompasses the broader scope of political dynamics at both local and EU level.

Methodology

The strength of Pleschová’s book lies in her heterogeneous methodological approach. The research is based on extensive primary and secondary research, which deserves recognition (also very inspiring for researchers). The interviews were conducted with V4 politicians, MEPs, journalists, academicians, and experts. The conclusions of this work are supported by massive heterogenous research material.

Depending on the nature of the described problem, the country, and the availability of data sets, Pleschová applied various methodologies. These include research methods such as process training (chapter 4). And the Foreign Policy Analysis serves as the entry theoretical framework. Moreover, she conducted primary research through qualitative interviews and surveys. However, subsequent chapters do not share the same methodology, which limits comparability.

This is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, it limits the ability for thorough comparison across the V4. On the other hand, I am convinced that since each country’s situation is unique and differs in many respects, comparisons through a very specific lens can sometimes simplify  the complex reality. Grouping countries together may seem appealing, but it rarely works when the aim is to uncover deep, layered motivations. Ultimately, even a single country goes through various phases within the democratic cycle, and the political attitude towards China has been changing to a certain extent, not only at the external level of international relations but also within internal politics.

Certainly, it is also worth adding that Pleschová compares both Western as well as Chinese concepts. When the topic of soft power is discussed, she refers both to the Nye definition, as well as to the Chinese ideas of softpower. For example, Pleschová mentions that ‘…the Chinese state perceives itself as the driving force, and sometimes as the only source, of China’s soft power initiatives’ (2022, p. 16). This is a great strength of this book, that it reconstructs and incorporates Chinese views and definitions.

In short, Pleschová’s work is based on the contextualization and localization of political problems, moral choices, and economic challenges of addressed countries. While she addresses regional dynamics, which often vary significantly among the V4 countries, she also places them within the larger context of China’s global governance ambitions.

Discussion part

Another comment refers to the conceptual design of this book and the ability to compare specific problems, processes, or cases across the V4. As Chapter 1 (C1) and Chapter 8 (C8) serve respectively as introduction and conclusion parts, the rest six chapters make up the core of the book:

The point that I want to make, is that the chapters C3 to C6 of the book could be separate articles, not sufficiently tackling the region in a comparative perspective.

The comparisons include very interesting developments such as:

Comparative study on the soft power and the presence of Confucius Institutes in the region, shifting human rights stances, and the Tibet-Taiwan question (C2). Pleschová makes a great point when she describes the shift from a value-based approach, popular in the 1990s after the end of communism, to an interest-based approach that began in the first decade of the 21st century. It was interesting to see that a similar shift occured roughly at the similar time among the V4 states. Although it was also heavily depended on which political party was in power. In a way, these changes started happening after the EU accession. And, the point is that the old EU did not have the post-Soviet experience, and largely benefited from business with China as they developed their company presence there (i.e., Germany, France, Scandinavia or Italy). The new EU members looked for globalization perspectives for their businesses and, I guess to a certain extent, wanted to repeat the China success stories of some of the big European enterprises.

Chapter 7 also puts Central Europe in a comparative perspective, but also mixes the story with the Europe’s stance on Market Economy Status (MES) and China. I find here the subchapter ‘Biases influencing the decisions makers’ perspective and the role of Central Europe’ as especially interesting..

On the other hand, it would be interesting to have a bit more comparative analysis among the V4 on the developments surrounding 5G, which would be as thorough as the chapter devoted to Slovakia. The book also lacks some hard data, that could be interesting for a comparison of interests, i.e., no data on the economic cooperation such as trade balance, investments (if they were), presence of Chinese companies and institutions such as banks. The question whether and how the V4 countries benefited from the cooperation has not been answered. And I believe these issues are crucial as often they rationalize political rapprochement to China.

Conclusions

In conclusion, I find Pleschová’s book very thought-provoking and inspiring. Certainly, it can serve as a handbook for scholars within and outside of the V4 region who aim to understand the local dynamics and China’s role in the CEE. It is a very valuable work, as it highlights interesting developments that are rarely thoroughly analyzed in the media outside the region, such as the Slovak dispute around 5G. It would be worthwhile to compare the 5G discussion cases (and other interesting developments) thoroughly throughout the whole book with all four countries. However, this would probably require another one or two volumes, which is… well worth writing!

Patrycja Pendrakowska Założycielka i wiceprezes zarządu Instytutu Boyma oraz analityk polityki zagranicznej i gospodarki Chin. Z ramienia Instytutu zajmuje się relacjami UE-ASEAN w ramach projektu EANGAGE koordynowanego przez KAS Singapore oraz metodą Betzavta z Instytutem Adama na rzecz Pokoju i Demokracji w Jerozolimie. Jest jednym z członków założycieli rady biznesowej WICCI w Indiach-UE z siedzibą w Bombaju. Koordynowała także transkulturową grupę badawczą dot. Inicjatywy Pasa i Szlaku zorganizowaną przez Leadership Excellence Institute Zeppelin. Jest doktorantką na Uniwersytecie Humboldta w Berlinie, gdzie prowadzi badania nad filozofią polityczną w Chinach. Ukończyła studia licencjackie na Wydziale Sinologii, Socjologii i Filozofii na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim oraz posiada dwa tytuły magistra prawa finansowego oraz etnografii i antropologii kulturowej Uniwersytetu Warszawskiego.