(iPoster) Values vs. Interests: Framing of Differences in the Green Party's China Policy

• In Event: Poster Session: Posters on European Politics, Advanced Industrial Societies, & Post-Soviet Politics
  In Poster Session: Poster Session: Posters on European Politics

Abstract

The relationship between China and Germany has historically been a balancing act between "values and other interests" (Damm 2023, 162) dating back to 1644, when Germany established military and economic ties with China during the Qing Dynasty (cf. ibid.). The significance of these economic relations is further highlighted by the fact that China was Germany's foremost trading partner in 2020 (cf. ibid., 163). Germany has traditionally maintained a pragmatic economic approach in the face of the prevailing tension between Western and Chinese nations (cf. ibid.). However, with the Greens Party assuming a leading force in the Foreign Office as part of the coalition government in 2021, the approach seemed to shift, introducing what the incumbent foreign minister Annalena Baerbock articulated as "a new tone in foreign relations" (Damm 2023, 162). The Green Party's foreign policy, referred to as "value-oriented foreign policy" (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen n.d.), is anchored in core principles prioritizing the promotion of democratic values, the protection of human rights, and the advancement of sustainability (cf. ibid.). A key aspect of this approach is the recognition of social equality as a crucial driver of economic prosperity (cf. ibid.). The coalition agreement of the current German federal government underscores the need for a comprehensive China strategy that integrates both normative and pragmatic considerations (cf. SPD, Bündnis 90/Die Grünen & FDP 2021, 124). Yet, the strategy paper released in 2023 falls short of adequately addressing the inherent tensions in this approach (cf. Pils & Weber, 2024, p. 328). When she took office, Baerbock emphasized the importance of adhering to value-driven principles with "decisiveness and creative engagement" (Baerbock 2021), though this commitment to values may necessitate pragmatic compromises in managing relations with China.
This paper examines the Greens' strategies for legitimizing the normative commitments with pragmatic constraints by employing a combination of frame analysis and discourse analysis. Discourse analysis explores how language constructs and negotiates meaning in political contexts (cf. Jorgensen & Phillips 2002, 1). The methodological approach focuses on uncovering the ways in which language actively shapes social realities and power dynamics, rather than merely reflecting them (cf. ibid., 2) which is beneficial when analyzing parliamentary debates, where competing narratives and ideological tensions are prevalent (cf. ibid.). The examination of discursive constructions of the China policy demonstrates how values and principles are strategically highlighted or marginalized to legitimize actions, reflecting broader struggles over meaning and power (cf. ibid., 6 ff.). This study also incorporates frame analysis, which provides a focused lens for examining how specific narratives and interpretations are constructed, emphasized, or contested within the political debates. The employment of frame analysis facilitates the identification of the underlying structures of meaning that govern the perception and response to issues (cf. Fairclough 2013, 78 ff.), thus offering a systematic approach to the exploration of the framing of the China policy in alignment with the Greens' value-driven foreign policy principles. Combined with discourse analysis, this methodological approach enables the investigation of not only the linguistic and rhetorical strategies used in parliamentary debates but also the broader sociopolitical dynamics that shape these frames. This integrated approach facilitates a comprehensive understanding of how frames operate within competing discourses, thereby shedding light on the strategic justification of policy decisions and their implications for the Greens' ideological coherence. The focus is on the plenary protocols and speeches of the Greens in the German Bundestag during the 20th legislative term and analyses how tensions between normative and pragmatic positions are communicated and legitimized. The following questions are of particular interest: (1) Which frames do the Greens use to align their China policy with their values? (2) What is the significance of security policy, the economy and human rights in the lines of argument? (3) To what extent do the legitimization strategies reflect the ambivalences of a value-driven foreign policy? The significance of the present research lies in its focus on the manner in which the German Greens, navigates the tension between normative commitments to values such as democracy and human rights, and the pragmatic realities and economic dependencies inherent in dealing with China, a rising global power. Since my research is still at an early stage, no conclusive results are yet available.

Author

• Isabel Maria Kenngott, Humboldt-Universiltät zu Berlin