세계금융위기와 베이징컨센서스의 대외적 확산?

김애경 연세대학교 동서문제연구원 2010 동서연구 Vol.22 No.2

이 글은 세계금융위기 이후 중국이 베이징컨센서스를 확산하는가에 대해분석한다. 2008년 세계금융위기는 워싱턴컨센서스의 발전모델로서의 적실성에 대한 의구심이 제기되고 이에 대한 대안을 모색할 필요성이 제기되면서베이징컨센서스이 주목을 받게 되었다. 특히 국제사회에서 중국의 정치ㆍ경제적 역할이 증가되고 개발도상국들이 중국에 보내는 긍정적 평가는 세계금융위기 이후 중국이 자국의 발전경험인 베이징컨센서스를 확산시킬 것이라는우려를 낳고 있다. 그러나 중국이 의도적으로 베이징컨센서스를 확대하고자한다고 판단하기에는 아직 이르다. 베이징컨센서스 자체가 가지는 불완전성,내재적 모순, 원칙 지향적 특성은 합의(consensus)라고 부르기에 부족하다. 중국은 아직 지속적으로 발전해야 하는 과제를 안고 있고 자신들의 책을 쓰고 있는 상황이다. 때문에 베이징컨센서스는 중국의 성공을 전제로 하는 진행형이다. 따라서 중국이 만약 금융위기로부터 상대적으로 상처 없이 잘 빠져나온다면 베이징컨센서스는 개발도상국이 선택할 수 있는 경제성장모델이될 수 있다. This article investigates that will China spread Beijing Consensus after global financial crisis. Many Analyst cast doubt on Washington Consensus that it is suitable for development model. Because it is suggested that the alternative should provide, Beijing Consensus is paid close attention after global financial crisis. In addition, as China's influence increase politically and economically in international society and developing countries stand for China, much concern is being voiced about spreading Beijing Consensus. But it seems a little early that China has a desire to spread Beijing Consensus. It is not suitable to call it Consensus as Beijing Consensus still has incompleteness. China has a mission that is to achieve continuous economic growth. So continuous economic growth is a prerequisite for Beijing Consensus and it is making now. If China would weather the crisis relatively without hardship, Beijing Consensus will be a model that developing countries wish to follow.

Beijing’s Unification Strategy toward Taiwan and Cross-Strait Relations

( Parris H. Chang ) 한국국방연구원 2014 The Korean Journal of Defense Analysis Vol.26 No.3

For almost a decade, Beijing has pursued a “soft” approach toward Taiwan, cultivating economic ties and political exchanges in its pursuit of reunification. Following the end of President Chen Shui-bian’s term in office, which was marked by constant tensions and several crises with China, Beijing has colluded with his successor, Ma Ying-jeou to pursue a policy of economic integration with the mainland. Beijing’s strategy toward Taiwan under Chairman Xi Jinping and his predecessor Hu Jintao has yielded positive results. The approach not only avoids possible military conflict with the United States, but receives support from Washington. Beijing’s economic means, such as the Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement (ECFA), have enhanced Taiwan’s economic integration with China and greatly increased the PRC’s control over Taiwan’s economy and society, helping to lock Taiwan into the mainland’s orbit. Likewise, Beijing has developed tools that allow it to intervene directly in Taiwanese domestic politics. However, efforts to use ties with President Ma to bring Taiwan farther into the PRC orbit have backfired, resulting in a weakened presidency that cannot deliver Beijing’s goals. Thus, Beijing appears to be looking ahead to the next two elections, trying to make as much progress as possible before Ma leaves office, while simultaneously trying to establish ties with possible successors and the opposition DPP. In 2012, Beijing’s intervention assisted the reelection of President Ma. It is sure to try again in Taipei’s mayoral election in 2014 and the presidential/parliamentary elections in 2016.

Beijing Consensus - The Case of China-Angola Relations -

한석희,F. John Henry Lim,Heajin Byun 국가안보전략연구원 2009 국가안보와 전략 Vol.9 No.4

Recently, much controversy has been surrounding China’s foreign policy towards Africa as African countries are progressively growing in favor of aligning with China over the United States. With China as their partner, African elites are able to maintain the status quo of their regimes, maintaining their power, while gaining development aid and support from China without the regulations and restrictions that democratic Western countries and Western-based organizations such as th IMF impose upon them. Generally, China new approach to the underdeveloped states like Africa has been called “Beijing Consensus.” Angola is a prime example fo this trend as in early 2005. This paper reviews and analyzes the effects and Iimitations of China’s Beijing Consensus projected over African states, in particular Angola. China’s Beijing Consensus has thus far been fairly successfully. However, with challenges also come opportunities. Understanding the realities of the Beijing Consensus towards the developing world will help mitigate apparent problems and advance the achievement of each party’s goals.

북중관계에 대한 재고: 베이징 컨센서스(Beijing Consensus)를 중심으로

박후건 ( Phillip H. Park ) 북한연구학회 2011 북한연구학회보 Vol.15 No.2

China`s economy has grown enough to help the United States of America, the largest economy of the world. Although whether China`s high economic growth could be maintained is still controversial, one view which argues that China already has strategy that competes against the America`s ``Washington Consensus`` is gaining currency. That view is wrapped in as ``Beijing Consensus.`` However, a careful study indicates that ``Beijing Consensus`` is not a grand strategy of China to replace the United States as a hegemonic power, but a kind of survival strategy that intends to resolve dilemma of China`s economic growth. In this respect, China reinforces economic aids and cooperations with development countries in order to gain economic benefit rather than enlarging its political influence to these countries. North Korea is no except to this. In other words, China-DPRK relation is largely based on each country`s national interest; hence, China`s influence on North Korea is rather limited. Nonetheless, if South Korea`s hard-lined policy (isolating and pressuring North Korea) toward North Korea continues by strengthening the USA-ROK alliance, North Korea does not have much choice but to increase dependency on China. This development in Northeast Asia, if continues, entails danger of solidifying new Cold War order in the region.

베이징 컨센서스 비판: 라모와 아리기의 논의를 중심으로

윤상우 아시아.유럽미래학회 2014 유라시아연구 Vol.11 No.4

Since 1978 China’s economic miracle has produced various developmental issues, and it was recently conceptualized as the ‘Beijing Consensus’ which would replace the Washington Consensus and suggest an alternative development option for the developing countries. However, it is argued that the discourse on the Beijing Consensus might misinterpret and distort the realities of China’s development experiences, and also misguide false alternative model to the Third world. This study attempts to review critically the discourse on the Beijing Consensus focusing on Ramo(2004)’s and Arrighi(2007)’s arguments, and to re-identify the natures and features of China’s development model. Ramo’s thesis has definitely so many limitations to explain the China’s experience, due to inadequate conceptualization of core factors enabling the Chinese miracle and to ad hoc interpretations disguising itself as scientific axioms just like quantum physics. And, Arrighi has argued that China’s renaissance in the reform era was associated with its historical traditions such as industrious revolution and Smithian natural path of development. However, Arrighi’s argument also did not make sense, because of false recognition on market-economy and capitalism, ‘orientalism in reverse’ toward China’s renaissance, and ad hoc explanations on transitions of world hegemony. Alternatively, this study identify China’s development model as mixed capitalism including coexistence of neoliberal market and developmental-keynesian interventionism. Also, we can find out that the chinese model have exceptional characteristics rather than universal properties, and have problems of its sustainability concerning about unbalance of accumulation.

사회주의의 중국화와 덩샤오핑이론 - 중국식 발전모델의 혁명사⋅문화사적 독해 -

전홍석 원광대학교 한중관계연구원 2021 韓中關係硏究 Vol.7 No.2

본 연구는 21세기 중국식 발전모델에 대한 새로운 이해의 지평을 넓히기 위해 기획 되었다. 2001년 미국 신경제의 거품이 꺼지고 중국의 성장활력이 다른 지역의 경제회 복에 크게 기여하면서 ‘신아시아시대—베이징 컨센서스(the Beijing Consensus)’가 다양 한 문맥에서 조명되고 있다. 여기서는 기본적으로 베이징 컨센서스가 사회주의혁명의 유산으로서의 중국식(중국특색) 사회주의에 원천을 둔다는 주장에 합류한다. 이른바 중국특색 사회주의란 현 중국공산당의 노선・방침・정책의 기조로서 직접적으로는 ‘덩 샤오핑(鄧小平)이론—실사구시實事求是사상’에 토대를 둔다. 따라서 본고는 덩샤오핑 이론의 전후맥락을 추적해 베이징 컨센서스의 원천, 즉 중국특색 사회주의의 혁명사・ 사상사・문화사적 실체와 그 전개양상을 검토했다. 또한 그에 대한 독법의 하나로 세계 최대의 현실사회주의와 베이징 컨센서스라는 성장모델을 만들어낸 사회주의의 중국화 실험이 전통사상에 뿌리를 둔 실사구시, 실용주의, 인민주의(민본사상), 소강小康사상 등을 매개로 전개되었다는 사실에 주목했다. 연구진행은 선행적으로 마오쩌둥(毛澤東) 시대와 연결되는 사회주의 중국화의 배경 속에서 덩샤오핑이론이 차지하는 담론사적 위치를 파악했다. 그런 다음에 덩샤오핑이론의 요체인 ‘소과도론’을 재구성해 중국특 색 사회주의의 역동성과 다면성을 관찰했다. 더해서 그 문화적·사상적 토대로서 전통 문화와의 연원관계를 추적・규명함으로써 중국모델의 원천으로서의 의미망을 보다 포 괄적이고 다원적인 시야에서 점검해보았다. This study was planned out to broaden the horizon of a new understanding of Chinese growth models in the 21st century. As the bubbles of the American new economy burst in 2001 and the growth energy of China greatly contributed to the economic restoration of other regions, new light has been shed on the ‘New Asian Age—Beijing Consensus’ under various context. This study joins the argument that the Beijing Consensus originates from Chinese socialism(socialism with Chinese characteristics), which is a heritage of the socialist revolution. So-called socialism with Chinese characteristics refers to the keynote of routes, principles, and policies of the Chinese Communist Party based on the ‘Deng Xiaoping Theory—empirical tradition ideology’. Accordingly, this paper reviewed the revolutionary, ideological, and cultural nature of socialism with Chinese characteristics and its development aspects as the source of the Beijing Consensus by tracking the context of the Deng Xiaoping Theory. In addition, this paper paid attention to the fact that the experiment on Chineseization of socialism, which generated the world’s largest real socialism and a growth model called the Beijing Consensus, was mediated by empirical tradition, pragmatism, populism(people-oriented ideology), and small tranquility rooted in the traditional ideology. The study was carried out by examining the discursive position of the Deng Xiaoping Theory in the background of Chineseization of socialism, which is connected to the Mao Zedong Era. ‘Small transition,’ the key point of the Deng Xiaoping Theory, was reorganized to observe the dynamics and manifold of socialism with Chinese characteristics. Moreover, by tracking and investigating the relationship with traditional cultures based on the cultural and ideological foundation, this paper inspected the semantic network of the Chinese model in more comprehensive and plural perspectives.

베이징 컨센서스

조슈아 쿠퍼 레이모(Joshua Cooper Ramo),김진공(번역자) 고려대학교 아세아문제연구소 2009 亞細亞硏究 Vol.52 No.3

The China’s experience and new ideas is not only a model for China, but has begun to remake the whole landscape of international development, economics, society and, by extension, politics. China’s new development approach, I call this the Beijing Consensus, replaces the widely-discredited Washington Consensus. It is driven by a desire to have equitable, peaceful high-quality growth, and turns traditional ideas like privatization and free trade on their heads. It does not believe in uniform solutions for every situation. It is defined by a ruthless willingness to innovate and experiment, by a lively defense of national borders and interests, and by the increasingly thoughtful accumulation of tools of asymmetric power projection. Beijing Consensus consists of three theorems. The first is the necessity of bleeding-edge innovation to create change the moves faster than the problems. This second theorem demands a development model where sustainability and equality become first considerations. Finally, the Beijing Consensus contains a theory of self-determination that stresses using leverage to move big, hegemonic powers, and the notion of asymmetric defense.

건당 초기 장선푸: 중국특색 사회주의의 맹아 - 혁명노정과 중국화론을 중심으로

전홍석 원광대학교 한중관계연구원 2021 韓中關係硏究 Vol.7 No.3

2000년대 초입 베이징 컨센서스(the Beijing Consensus, 北京共識)가 제기된 뒤로 중국 식 발전모델을 규명하려는 논의가 인문・사회과학 분야에서 다각적으로 진행되고 있다. 그 요지는 현 중국의 발전양태는 사회주의혁명의 유산인 ‘중국특색 사회주의’에 원천 을 둔다는 견해로 모아지고 있다. 이렇듯 중국식 발전모델을 설명하는 핵심기제인 중 국특색 사회주의는 마르크스주의(Marxism) 중국화 과정에서 서구사상, 전통문화, 실천 경험, 혁명실제 등이 혼종화(hybridization)된 중국경험의 결정체이다. 더욱이 중국특색 사회주의는 중국공산주의운동사에서 마르크스주의 중국화의 전체적인 전후맥락을 포 괄한다. 그럼에도 현재 국내외의 중국특색 사회주의, 곧 마르크스주의 중국화 연구는 대체로 중국공산주의운동사의 제2기에 국한시켜 조명한다는 점에서 한계를 노정한다. 마르크스주의 중국화는 중국공산당의 건당建黨 초기부터 태동했다. 중국공산당의 3대 창시자로 꼽히는 장선푸(張申府, 1893~1986)가 그 주역 중의 하나이다. 장선푸철학은 오늘날의 중국특색 사회주의를 설명하는 대부분의 핵심명제들을 간직한다. 그것은 현 중국공산당과 국가의 지도이념인 마오쩌둥(毛澤東)사상, 덩샤오핑(鄧小平)이론 등으로 이어지는 마르크스주의 중국화의 유전지도라고 할 수 있다. 장선푸는 20세기 전반 혁 명노정路程 속에서 일찍부터 ‘실實’사상에 입각해 실사구시實事求是를 제시함은 물론, 중국화에 대한 비교적 선명한 의식과 실질, 구체화, 전통문화와의 결합, 공농工農혁명, 실재적 인간관, 인식과 실천의 관계, 자각능동성 등을 개진했다. 베이징 컨센서스와 그 원천으로서의 중국특색 사회주의를 고찰할 때 장선푸를 호명하고 반추해야 하는 이유이다. After the Beijing Consensus was raised in the early 2000s, there have been multilateral discussions in the fields of humanities and social sciences to investigate Chinese development models. The essence of such discussions is rooted in ‘Chinese style socialism,’ which is a legacy of the socialist revolution. Chinese style socialism, the core mechanism that explains Chinese development models, is the outcome of Chinese experience that hybridizes the Western ideology, traditional culture, practical experience, and actuality of revolution in the chinization process of Marxism. Moreover, Chinese style socialism embraces the overall context before and after the Chinization of Marxism in the history of Chinese communist movements. Nonetheless, domestic and foreign studies on Chinese style socialism or Chinization of Marxism expose limits in that they are restricted to the second stage of the history of Chinese communist movements. The Chinization of Marxism began in the early stage of foundation of the Chinese Communist Party. Zhang Shenfu(1893~1986) is one of the leaders depicted as one of the three founders of the Chinese Communist Party. The Zhang Shengfu philosophy includes most of the core propositions that explain Chinese style socialism of today. His philosophy can be regarded as the genetic map of Chinization of Marxism, which leads to the national guiding philosophies of the Chinese Communist Party, such as the Mao Zedong Thought and Deng Xiaoping Theory. Zhang Shenfu proposed to seek truth from facts based on the realist ideology from the early days amid the revolution journey in the early 20th century, expressing a relatively clear awareness of Chinization, embodiment, combination with traditional culture, revolution of workers and peasants, real human views, relationship between perception and practice, and active self-awareness. For these reasons, Zhang Shenfu must be called and reminded when discussing the Beijing Consensus and Chinese style socialism as the source of the Beijing Consensus.

중국의 외국인직접투자(FDI)와 중국식 발전모델

이민자 (李民子 LEE Min-Ja) 신아시아연구소(구 신아세아질서연구회) 2009 신아세아 Vol.16 No.2

중국 경제개혁의 특징은 ‘외국인 직접투자(FDI: Foreign Direct Investment)’를 중심으로 수출주도형 경제발전을 추진하여 고도성장에 성공한 것이다. 중국 FDI에 관한 기존연구는 경제발전의 시각에서 순기능과 역기능을 설명하는데 중점을 두었다. 그러나 2001년 이후 중국의 FDI 정책이 변화되고 있는데 그 이유는 무엇이며, 이런 FDI 정책 변화를 ‘중국식 발전 모델’의 시각에서 어떻게 볼 수 있는지, FDI가 중국의 사회․정치적 변화의 차원에서 어떤 함의를 지니는지에 관한 연구는 상대적으로 소홀히 다루어졌다. 이 논문은 1992년부터 2001년 WTO 가입 이전까지 FDI 의존적 발전, 2001년 이후 FDI 개방 확대, FDI 우대정책 폐지 및 관리 강화라는 정책변화를 ‘중국식 발전모델(Beijing Consensus)’의 시각에서 연구한다. 핵심 문제의식은 다음과 같다. 첫째, 동아시아국가들이 차관 의존적 발전을 한 것과 달리 중국은 1992년 이후 왜 FDI 의존적 발전방식을 선택했는가? 둘째, 2001년 이후 FDI 정책 변화의 핵심 내용은 무엇이며 왜 이런 변화가 발생했는 가? FDI 정책 변화는 ‘중국식 발전모델’의 시각에서 어떻게 해석할 수 있는가? 셋째, 중국정부의 FDI 정책이 중국의 민주화를 지연시키고 공산당 통치체제 유지에 기여했는가? 이런 의문들에 대한 해답을 찾는 과정을 통해 중국의 ‘경제개혁 심화’와 ‘공산당체제 유지’를 중국식 발전모델의 특징으로 설명하고 있다. Chinese economic reform has successfully accomplished high growth of economy by adopting export promotion policy on the basis of foreign direct investment(FDI). Studies about Chinese FDI policy, until now, have focused on good and bad effects on economic development. There has not been enough research on the cause of Chinese FDI policy change after joining WTO in 2001, its relations to Chinese development model, and the influence of FDI policy on socio-political change. This study focuses on Chinese FDI policy change on the basis of Beijing Consensus: i. e., FDI dependent development from 1992 to joining WTO in 2001, open-door policy for FDI after 2001, and the abolition of preferential policy for FDI and intensification of management. I raised four questions in detail. First, why China chose FDI dependent development after 1992 while other East Asian countries chose foreign loan dependent development? Second, what was the contents of main change of FDI policy after 2001 and the meaning in terms of Chinese development model, and what was the reason? Third, did Chinese FDI policy change contribute to sustain the governing of communist party and to delay democratization? Answering these questions, I explained Chinese ‘strong economic reform’ and ‘the sustenance of communist party system’ as the special feature of Chinese development model.

중국 발전모델의 특징 - 동아시아 발전 모델과의 유사성과 차이점 분석

이민자(李民子) 신아시아연구소(구 신아세아질서연구회) 2008 신아세아 Vol.15 No.1

  그동안 중국 국내외에서 개혁기 중국 경제발전 방식은 기존 경험과 얼마나 유사하며, 다른가라는 논쟁이 제기되었다. 중국 발전모델은 동아시아 발전모델의 또 다른 한 형태라는 주장이 제기된 바 있다. 그러나 2004년 베이징 컨센서스(Beijing Consensus) 개념이 제기된 후, 새로운 ‘중국 발전모델’의 출현에 관한 논의가 주목받고 있다. 이 연구에서는 중국 발전모델을 ‘동아시아 발전모델’과 비교하여 그 유사성과 차이점을 분석함으로써 중국 발전모델의 적실성 혹은 실체를 밝히고자 했다. 연구결과에 의하면, 중국 발전모델은 동아시아 발전모델과 유사성을 지님과 동시에 동아시아 발전모델로는 설명할 수 없는 중국적 특수성이 있다. 따라서 동아시아 모델과의 유사성 및 중국적 특수성이 공존하는 혼합적 발전 방식이 바로 ‘중국 발전모델의 특징이라 설명했다.   There have been debates over Chinese economic development pattern whether it is similar with former development pattern of other countries or not. Some scholars contended that Chinese development model is another version of East Asian development model. Since the concept of "Beijing Consensus" was presented in 2004, however, scholars have given attention to the new Chinese Development Model.<BR>  The purpose of this research is to examine the similarity and difference between Chinese Development Model and East Asian development model. The findings are Chinese Development Model has its own particularity which cannot be explained by East Asian Development model although it has some similarity. Consequently, Chinese Development Model is a mixed model where Chinese distinctiveness and general aspect of East Asian Development model coexist.