| dc.description.abstract | In this study, Qviller examines China’s response to internal disaffection and turmoil and asks what China can bring to the table as a partner in international operations.China’s response to extremism, separatism and terrorism (EST) is formulated by the political authorities who take a long-term view. The involvement of the security forces is secondary to the political effort, and the government attempts to address the underlying causes of discontent by gradually relaxing restrictions on freedom of expression and stimulating economic growth. The government’s use of force foments discontent, however, and weakens the effect of the social and economic reforms.Insofar as China is also a global player, it would be logical to expect the country to augment its engagement and cooperation– including military cooperation – with the international community in the years ahead. Qviller therefore compares the Chinese approach to Western principles of counterinsurgency (COIN), and asks where they compare and where they diverge.To exemplify his thesis, Qviller examines action taken by the Chinese authorities in the troubled province of Xinjiang, and shows the Chinese government’s method of working through regional organisations such as the Shanghai group to prevent the internationalisation of what it views as domestic issues.As China’s global role grows, it is particularly apt to explore the perspective it will bring to bear in international counterinsurgency operations. While China’s approach is similar in many respects to classical Western thought, it has less in common with current counterinsurgency thinking within NATO. | nb_NO |
