III.“Bilateral+Multilateral” Cooperation Theory: A New Theoretical Construction
In discussing China-CEEC Cooperation, different theories have generated different influences and produced different interpretation approaches, which enriched our understanding of the cooperation framework and made a good theoretical accumulation.
At the same time, it should be noted that the above theories have certain pitfalls, and they can complement with each other.
（1）Inadequacies of Existing Theories
Although the GCD theory works well for understanding China-CEEC Cooperation, since it only focuses on analyzing the external form and specific content of cooperation, it underlines the perspective of diplomacy studies to a certain extent. Its disciplinary attribute is obvious, but the theoretical nature is slightly insufficient. In order to accurately and completely understand the essential characteristics of GCD, it is necessary to further analyze and judge GCD theory building on the above research, and highlight its core characteristics.
The role of institutions in China-CEEC Cooperation has always been a controversial issue. It is politically sensitive in research, because EU regulations restrict member states and candidate countries from forming new specific institutional arrangements with extraterritorial countries that are potentially detrimental to European solidarity. This is obviously different from the relationship between China and the ASEAN, African Union, and Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which are relatively independent organizations. The CEECs are strongly constrained by the EU and have ceded part of their sovereignty. They are not an independent region. This is why, in the practical promotion of China-CEEC Cooperation, China has been undermining the institutional nature and emphasizing the platform attribute as well as the open and inclusive attribute, so as to avoid conflicts caused by different understandings on institutions between China and Europe. In addition, whether China-CEEC Cooperation itself can be seen as an institution is debatable. Some scholars believe that this kind of cooperation is more like a mechanism, therefore, it is not suitable for analysis from the institutionalism perspective. Between institution and cooperation, more emphasis is placed on cooperation. Institution is only a tool, and the purpose of cooperation is achieved through flexible arrangements. The China-CEEC Cooperation itself does not aim to establish a specific institution （or regulation）. From the perspective of Chinese diplomatic practice, it is also controversial whether China is providing regional public goods to the CEE region. In connectivity cooperation, China does not seek dominance and does not force to sell its cooperation products, but seeks common will and needs, which is different from the pursuit of dominance emphasized by the public goods theory. At the same time, although China attempts to facilitate cooperation, whether it can sustainably provide public goods in connectivity is not without doubt. At present, the connectivity construction has only produced a certain effect in the Western Balkans, so its representativeness is insufficient, and the theoretical coverage is relatively limited.
It is difficult to apply inclusive regionalism theory to explain the China-CEEC Cooperation. China and CEECs have cross-regional characteristics in geography, and the CEE region itself is not a completely homogeneous region. With the joining of Greece, the theory’s regional orientation is further diluted, and thus we have to discuss regionalism in somewhere that is not a region in full sense. China-CEEC Cooperation is actually an innovative reshaping of Eastern Europe in historical sense, rather than promoting or even strengthening a sort of regionalism. Regionalism in CEE has a distinct European nature and feature of exclusivity. Therefore, it becomes questionable whether China implements regional cooperation in a real sense, which undermines the interpretation capacity of regionalism theory on China-CEEC Cooperation.
（2）The “Bilateral+Multilateral” Theory （BMT）and Its Interpretation Capacity
In fact, in Chinese diplomacy with some specific regions and groups in the new era, the gradually emerging “bilateral+multilateral” color has certain prospects and potential for theorization, which to some extent makes up for the above theories. [6]
The BMT argues that bilateral cooperation is the foundation and fundamental goal, while multilateral cooperation is the functional enhancement, expansion, and spillover of bilateral cooperation. Bilateral cooperation between China and other countries goes hand in hand with multilateral cooperation on a broader platform. The two complement and promote each other. Although some Chinese scholars have mentioned in relevant theories that China-CEEC Cooperation is to strengthen and deepen bilateral relations, the theoretical explanation is not thorough. The BMT further clarifies the basic characteristics of cooperation, which essentially is the development of bilateral relations. On the basis of strengthening the development of bilateral relations, consensus is formed to promote the development of multilateral cooperation, which in turn further feed back and promote bilateral relations.
This theoretical framework stresses that cooperation between China and CEECs is mainly to develop bilateral relationship between China and each CEEC, which is a relatively intensive, streamlined, flexible, and efficient approach. Without bilateral relations as the basis and foundation, multilateralism is destined to be fragile. On the basis of developing solid bilateral relations, it aims to enhance the scale, quality, and potential of multilateral cooperation, and enlarge the space for bilateral cooperation, so as to further promote the development of multilateral relations. China-CEEC Cooperation, characterized by the BMT, is “one body with two wings”, and the bilateral and multilateral move hand in hand, but the bilateral is in the front while the multilateral follows. It not only pursues the balanced development of the two, but also emphasizes some sides. The development of multilateral relies on bilateral promotion, and then form a complex bilateral and multilateral development pattern, which is the essence of the BMT.
Firsthy, in terms of concept and connotation, the relationship and conceptual expression of “bilateral+multilateral” can greatly enrich the content of China-CEEC Cooperation.
It embodies the logic of interaction, the entangled existence, and the tension of relations between bilateral and multilateral. “Bilateral+multilateral” covers actors and interaction methods that cannot be included in previous cooperation theories. It not only presents an image of bilateral interaction, but also is followed up with multilateral interaction, in which mini-lateral and sub-multilateral cooperation can be easily incorporated. Due to the emphasis on “side” rather than “country” as the cooperation subject, the concept scope is expanded. Cooperation is not limited to state actors, it includes sub-national actors. The participation of multiple types of actors, such as international organizations, institutes, cities, localities, enriches the connotation of multilateralism and consolidates the sustainable development of bilateral relations. China-CEEC Cooperation is a profound reflection of this concept.
Secondly, in terms of function, the multilateralism promoted by China-CEEC Cooperation is a whole-process and refined multilateralism.
It roots in the dynamic development of bilateral relations. It does not pursue the smallest and most consistent consensus within the multilateral scope, but pursues the largest and most diverse mutual understanding. Through the concept and practice of pragmatic cooperation, it leads cooperation towards openness, inclusiveness, and reciprocity. This sort of multilateralism relies on the sound development of bilateral relations, rather than squeezing the space of bilateral relations. At the same time, this kind of multilateralism comes naturally. Relying on good bilateral relations, the development of bilateral relations in the whole region spills over to the multilateral field, which not only meets China’s demands for multilateral cooperation, but also meets the development needs of countries in the region. It can be seen that the European regionalism concept emphasise the fundamental premise of multilateralism. In order to deepen cooperation, it is necessary to adhere to multilateralism. The premise of regionalism concept in China-CEEC Cooperation is the fundamental development of bilateral relations. In this case, bilateral is applied to boost multilateral, while multilateral is used to consolidate bilateral, the two foster one another.
Thirdly, from a technical point of view, China-CEEC Cooperation has more practical and popularization significance.
For China to develop bilateral relations, although “one country, one policy” is a basic premise, the input cost is relatively huge, and the efficiency is neither economical nor intensive, because there are always some common contents and areas in bilateral relations, and some of them can be intersected. It is completely possible to build a platform and solve these disputes within a multilateral framework. If multilateral solutions cannot be reached, bilateral methods can be used to refine and cultivate them. Therefore, this approach can help save a lot of diplomatic resources, improve cooperation efficiency and upgrade multilateralism.
（3）The Advantages and Disadvantages of the BMT
Firstly, it inherits and absorbs the advantages of existing theories and makes scientific expansion.
The BMT inherits and innovates the aforementioned theories. From the perspective of diplomacy studies, the “bilateral+multilateral” diplomatic form and interaction approach can well accommodate the basic characteristics and forms of GCD, and it also points out the essence of China’s foreign interactions: developing bilateral relations and seeking multilateral effects. Because of the existence of multilateral cooperation form, the BMT actually has a certain pan-regional orientation, although its shape is scattered, the spirit is not. Multilateralism is not empty and must be developed with the help of specific organizations, platforms, issues or regional orientations, otherwise, multilateralism will become “water without source” or “tree without root”. The connotation of multilateral in the theory is far beyond regionalism in the general sense, and multilateralism rather than regionalism is applied to reflect more inclusiveness. As a new form of institutional construction, the BMT is more inclusive than existing institutionalist analysis approaches. Institutionalism pursues specific institutional forms and behaviors under its influence, while the BMT gives participants more institutional identities, who are not only the subjects of bilateral cooperation, but also participants of multilateral cooperation. On one platform, they can choose the way of participation and interaction that suits their own interests according to different institutional identities, which is both pragmatic and flexible. But, they do not pursue the construction of a strong system, which avoids the pitfalls of institutionalist theory. The BMT not only provides a conceptual regional public goods, but also used to help countries accurately connect with each other by taking root in reality and existing regional countries through exchanges and interactions, and finally, provide supplies and needs that meet the other party. Its interpretation capacity is stronger than the existing regional public goods theory.
The design of the BMT framework makes the multilateralism or regionalism that China upholds in its cooperation with CEECs not necessarily conceptual and institutional （not the pursuit of institutionalism）, but more emphasis is placed on the functional and progressive nature of cooperation. The essence of cooperation is to find more intersections, continuously expand the circle of cooperation friends and make the cooperation “cake” bigger. The bilateral and multilateral interaction logic within the China-CEEC Cooperation framework is rich and profound.
Secondly, it improves the identification and interpretation capacity of existing regional cooperation and multilateral diplomacy.
The BMT that China-CEEC Cooperation adheres to has expanded its influence on China’s regional cooperation diplomacy to some extent, and improved its theoretical interpretation capacity. China’s cooperation with Shanghai Cooperation Organization, ASEAN, Africa, and Latin America also applies to this theory. Cooperating with these countries with the guide of the BMT will help to generate a “point-to-area” radiation effect, while carrying out multilateral diplomacy through the establishment of platforms will help to generate the concentrated effect of “promoting points with areas”. This cooperation model not only pays attention to the characteristics of partner countries, carries out bilateral cooperation in a targeted manner, but also pays attention to the multilateral mechanism in which the partner countries participate, establishes and promotes cooperation within multilateral organizations or frameworks, and combines multilateral cooperation with bilateral cooperation. This will help build a network of partners and expand the distinctive Chinese diplomacy. Therefore, the BMT formed on the basis of China-CEEC Cooperation can also be easily extended to other regional cooperation practices, forming a good theoretical explanation and enhancing the recognition and influence of Chinese diplomacy.
Thirdly, at the same time, it should be acknowledged that the BMT still needs to be improved in practice, because the lack of theoretical interpretation capacity in specific fields can easily lead to doubts about the legitimacy of China-CEEC cooperation. The deficiencies of the BMT are as follows.
a. Trade-off of interests of member states.
The BMT considers the external interaction and its effects, and the analysis of the internal mechanism is relatively weak or insufficient. It defaults that all actors rationally participate in cooperation and gain benefits, so that the sustainability of bilateral and multilateral interaction process is guaranteed. However, it does not take into account the trade-off of interests, that is, in the complex interaction process, if multiple member states choose to give up or take “passive free-rider” behavior when considering that the cost of participation outweighs benefits, the problem of insufficient interaction may arise.
Apart from the logic of interests trade-off, the theory cannot solve the problem of passive participation of actors. China-CEEC Cooperation is based on the development of bilateral relations, and the promotion and coordination of multilateral relations should be strengthened. In theory, the mutual promotion of the two can bring about inclusive and balanced development, and can better highlight the value of the cooperation platform. But so far, the outputs of the Cooperation have been uneven across countries. There are more investments in the Visegrád Group countries （Poland, Hungary, Czech Republic, Slovakia）, more connectivity projects in the Western Balkan countries, and relatively few projects in the Baltic countries, causing dissatisfaction in Lithuania etc. . Even countries such as Poland declared that the cooperation did not meet their original expectations, resulting in dissatisfaction. The CEECs should also be blamed for the current situation. Some of them are not proactive in cooperation, and the problems of “waiting, taking, sticking, and requiring” always exist. But for the BMT itself, this situation will increase the pressure from the partners, that is, the effectiveness of China-CEEC cooperation itself.
b. The logic construction of bilateral and multilateral interactions.
For the complex interaction logic of bilateral and multilateral cooperation, the theory defaults that interaction is formed naturally, because multiple good bilateral cooperation promotes the development of multilateral relations, and the logic of “+” in “bilateral+multilateral” and how the interaction takes place is ambiguous, and more cases are needed to underpin it. In practice, there is the view of “anti-interaction”, which highlights the contradiction between bilateral and multilateral relations. For example, some think tanks of CEECs state that considering the existing bilateral cooperation, it is confusing that the China-CEEC Cooperation is launched. For some of them, the China-CEEC Cooperation is crowding out the cooperation space of existing bilateral relations, and thus argue that the China-CEEC Cooperation is “useless”. Especially for some countries with relatively sound bilateral cooperation mechanisms with China, or countries that obtain less benefits from the Cooperation, the recognition of China-CEEC Cooperation framework is modest. Instead, they analyze and interpret the Cooperation from the perspective of politicization or values, believe that China-CEEC Cooperation is to “divide and rule” the EU, trying to penetrate into the political field through economic tools and project China’s influence.
For solving this kind of problem, it is necessary to coordinate bilateral and multilateral relations and enhance their mutual promotion. At the same time, it is also necessary to use evidence to prove the shortcomings of this view. For example, since the establishment of China-CEEC Cooperation, the trade between China and the 17 CEECs has exceeded 100 billion dollars increased by 85% （8% per year）in 9 years, which is much higher than the growth rate of China’s overall foreign trade volume and China-EU trade volume in the same period. Cooperation between China and CEECs will help to strengthen overall planning and coordination, and promote the improvement and upgrading of cooperation. Individual country may not be able to carry out cross-border cooperation with China, the Hungary-Serbia Railway and the China-Europe Land-Sea Express Line are all outcomes of multi-country collaboration.
c. Dissolving effect on multilateralism diplomacy.
China upholds multilateralism on the global stage, firmly opposes hegemonism and power politics, and actively promotes the democratization and multi-polarization of the international order. On some global issues, such as climate change, global governance, regional conflicts, China and the EU share common aspirations and a good foundation for cooperation. However, as China actively promotes all-round foreign cooperation diplomacy, especially regional and sub-regional cooperation diplomacy, it has also attracted the attention of Western countries. Some people believe that China’s multilateral diplomacy is essentially bilateral, and China’s multilateral diplomacy is only an adding layer of bilateral diplomacy. At the same time, by developing different bilateral relations and regional cooperation partnerships, China’s multilateral diplomacy is too pragmatic and selective. It is not an application of ideas, but a “white cat, black cat” theory in practice. On the issue of “rules-based multilateralism”, Europe and the United States insist on the argument that China’s diplomatic pragmatism has infringed on multilateralism.