IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ajo/reissc/v8y2025i2p54-65id353.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Study of U.S. Think Tanks’ Cognition of Sino-US Track II Diplomacy

Author

Listed:
  • Xiaoning LI
  • Peiqing GUO

Abstract

Against the backdrop of heightened risks between China and the United States, coupled with intensifying U.S. strategic pressure toward China, this study examines American think tanks’ perceptions of Sino-U.S. Track II diplomacy to identify key concerns and potential misperceptions within U.S. policy circles. The research conducts textual analysis of 18 research reports published by 13 leading U.S. think tanks addressing bilateral Track II diplomatic engagements. Findings reveal that U.S. think tanks generally hold a predominantly positive attitude toward Track II diplomacy, explicitly acknowledging its unique role in facilitating intergovernmental communication. However, persistent challenges including linguistic barriers and trust deficit significantly constrain the effectiveness of U.S.-China Track II interactions. The study particularly highlights the emerging phenomenon of “pan-securitization” in academic exchanges, urging scholarly communities to address this concerning trend and proactively promote the restoration of bilateral academic cooperation.

Suggested Citation

  • Xiaoning LI & Peiqing GUO, 2025. "The Study of U.S. Think Tanks’ Cognition of Sino-US Track II Diplomacy," Research in Social Sciences, Academia Publishing Group, vol. 8(2), pages 54-65.
    • Handle: RePEc:ajo:reissc:v:8:y:2025:i:2:p:54-65:id:353
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://academiainsight.com/index.php/riss/article/view/353/188
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ajo:reissc:v:8:y:2025:i:2:p:54-65:id:353. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Lucía Aguado (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academiainsight.com/index.php/riss/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.