Data

In terms of data, I used several different sources to produce a more balanced and possibly more diverse picture of Chinese Africa policy. I sought to use data from Chinese and American sources to create a balanced result although it was more difficult to access these sources due to issues over access and transparency. By using these three primary sources of data, I sought to explore the two perspectives that I have outlined although I am also aware of the limitations of this approach. Since my proposed research aims to explore the official discourse on China in Africa, it was necessary to explore official sources, particularly governmental statements. This was due to them reflecting the official narratives on China in Africa as providing a potential opportunity to explore the underlying points beneath these statements. The corpuses were taken from timeframes in line with the change of administrations to examine how the constructs and rhetoric evolved over time, an example of this being the prevalence of the construct of the China Dream becoming the mission statement of the Xi era. In contrast to other sources, their overall utility is further augmented by their ease of access and availability, thus building a more comprehensive illustration of the respective discourses. It is the selection of these sources of data that illustrates the first steps for the operationalization of the concepts from the literature review, so they can be applied to the case studies

67

For the American discourse, I used statements from American governmental bodies, which ties into the perception of the West and the United States being synonymous, which has been a common image that the Chinese perception often measures itself against. One such source was statements from the Department of State regarding Chinese policy in Africa. This was particularly useful in exploring the official American narrative on Chinese foreign policy and providing examples of the possible norms that create the American discourse which will be of note in reference to the common American norms of democratic values and human rights concerns. In a similar vein, I also examined statements from the American embassy and consulates in Sudan as any other potential regions of interest. While this is in line with the statements created by the State Department, it can be possible to identify possible variations between the two. These were more case specific which served to explore the case study of Chinese foreign policy in Sudan. I have selected this source as the U.S. has been the most vocal critic of Chinese foreign policy, serving to represent the Western world in the Chinese mind (Wang, 2008, pg. 265). By approaching it from this way, it was possible to operationalize the Anglophone literature and to explore a more unified narrative on this subject.

I also used several Chinese sources of data. It was necessary to explore official Chinese sources in parallel to those of the United States to further explore how the constructs created in the official Chinese discourse respond to those created by the American narrative. An initial example can be found in the policy statements of the Chinese Foreign Ministry. These statements were of utility when contrasted against the American sources on the same subject, thus providing an initial example of the power relations reflected in the discourse on China in Africa. By utilizing sources from parallel institutions, I intended to explore the ways in which the binaries on China in Africa present in the established literature were present in the official narratives.

Over the course of the research process, a sample of the two corpuses were subjected to the coding process. In the case of Sudan, the American corpus was larger than its Chinese counterpart, consisting of 59 reports, 9 statements and 4 interviews, while the available Chinese corpus only consisted of 8 reports, 5 speeches and 24 press conferences. The period from which these texts were taken from was between 2006 to 2016, which includes two different administrations in both countries. This period also explains the larger size of the American corpus due to the context of the Darfur crisis, which drew criticism from Washington at the time. While the selection of this period was a result of the availability of the sources, it was of significance in this case study since the shift in governments in both China and the U.S. enabled

68

me to chart the shifts in their images of China’s African policies. This period also includes two of the most notable events in Sudan’s recent history, the Darfur crisis and South Sudan’s secession from the north. The former drew international criticism of Khartoum, and by extension, Beijing, over China’s support for Sudan during the crisis. By taking this approach, it is possible to explore the creation of the knowledge on China in Africa and how they are influenced by events in Sudan alongside the changes over time. In the case of Zimbabwe, each corpus only consisted of two types of text. For the American corpus, this came in the form of reports and speeches. The overall size of the American corpus in this case study has been smaller than that of the previous case study, consisting of 37 reports and 9 statements. On the other hand, the Chinese corpus has had a greater number of texts in the form of 48 reports and 20 speeches. The discrepancy in the overall size of the Chinese sample of texts can be attributed to the long-standing ties between China and Zimbabwe. These texts were taken from the same period as those from the case of Sudan to explore any possible shifts in the depictions of China’s activities in Zimbabwe as well as to examine any similarities and variations with the case of Sudan.

To explore China’s response to the accusations made in the American corpus, I attempted to utilize a discourse analysis on official Chinese statements on Chinese foreign policy in Africa. This was subject to a social linguistic approach in that the research design will primarily focus on the response and the context in which it was created. This analysis explored the context of the accusation of imperialism and China’s experience of imperialism along with the Chinese response to these statements to explore how China responds to these statements as how this response is created. In all, I will utilize several different sources of primary data to better ground the work and to support the three perspectives outlined. I am also aware of the difficulty of obtaining these sources of data, particularly those from China and Africa, as factors that could have hampered the overall utility of my proposed sources.

The sample size has also been expressive of several elements in the cases of China’s African policies. This can initially be seen in how the smaller sample size of the American corpus regarding China’s engagement with Zimbabwe can be seen as being illustrative of how the African states have largely been overlooked in the Post-Cold War era, which created a vacuum that China was able to fill. On the other hand, the larger sample of the American corpus regarding the case of Sudan is indicative of the factors within the case studies that affect the corpus, in this case, the controversy regarding China’s ties to Sudan during the Darfur crisis. In addition, the sample size has also been representative of the depth and duration of China’s

69

relationships with the African states, with the larger Chinese corpus in the case of Zimbabwe reflecting China’s long-standing ties with the country compared to China’s more recent engagement with Sudan. It is these aspects that have influenced the availability and size of the sample as well as the form that the constructs take in each case study, which affected the shape that the corpuses would take in each case study.