Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T10:58:16.029Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

China, India, and the social construction of technology in international society: The English School meets Science and Technology Studies

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 September 2020

Dimitrios Stroikos Open the ORCID record for Dimitrios Stroikos [Opens in a new window]
Dimitrios Stroikos*
Affiliation:
Department of Politics, University of York, York, United Kingdom
*
*Corresponding author. Email: dimitrios.stroikos@york.ac.uk
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In recent years, there has been a growing scholarly interest in how International Relations theory can contribute to our understanding of the impact of technology on global politics, underpinned mainly by an engagement with Science and Technology Studies (STS). However, less attention has been paid to the ways in which international society shapes technology. Building on sociological and historical studies of science and technology, this article outlines one way through which international society has constituted technology by developing a synthetic account of the emergence of technological advancement as a ‘standard of civilisation’ in the nineteenth century that differentiated the ‘society of civilised states’ from non-European societies, with a particular focus on China and India. In doing so, this article also highlights how this process has had a powerful and enduring influence on Chinese and Indian conceptions about science and technology. Thus, by shifting the focus from how technology shapes global politics to how international society shapes technology, this article provides new insights into the relationship between technology, power, and modernity in an interdisciplinary context. It also offers a new way of thinking about the complex dynamics of today's global politics of technology.

Keywords

Technology‘Standard of Civilisation’ChinaIndiaInternational Society
Type
Research Article
Information
Review of International Studies , Volume 46 , Issue 5 , December 2020 , pp. 713 - 731
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2020. Published by Cambridge University Press on behalf of the British International Studies Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Examples are: Carr, Madeline, ‘Power plays in global internet governance’, Millennium, 43:2 (2015), pp. 640–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Herrera, Geoffrey L., Technology and International Transformation: The Railroad, the Atom Bomb, and the Politics of Technological Change (Albany: State University of New York Press, 2006)Google Scholar; Deudney, Daniel H., Bounding Power: Republican Security Theory from the Polis to the Global Village (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2007)Google Scholar; Manjikian, Mary, ‘Becoming unmanned’, International Feminist Journal of Politics, 16:1 (2014), pp. 48–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mayer, Maximilian, Carpes, Mariana, and Knoblich, Ruth (eds), The Global Politics of Science and Technology, Vol. 1: Concepts from International Relations and Other Disciplines (Heidelberg: Springer, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Peoples, Columba, Justifying Ballistic Missile Defence: Technology, Security and Culture (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010)Google Scholar.

2 McCarthy, Daniel R., ‘Introduction: Technology in world politics’, in McCarthy, Daniel R. (ed.), Technology and World Politics: An Introduction (London: Routledge, 2018), p. 2Google Scholar. For good overviews of the traditional IR approaches to technology, inter alia, see Carr, Madeline, US Power and the Internet in International Relations (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Fritsch, Stefan, ‘Technology and global affairs’, International Studies Perspectives, 12:1 (2011), pp. 27–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Herrera, Technology and International Transformation; and McCarthy, ‘Introduction’.

3 Buzan, Barry and Lawson, George, The Global Transformation: History, Modernity and the Making of International Relations (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Herrera, Technology and International Transformation.

4 See, for example, Carr, US Power and the Internet; Herrera, Technology and International Transformation; Fritsch, ‘Technology’; Mayer, Maximilian and Acuto, Michele, ‘The global governance of large technical systems’, Millennium, 43:2 (2015), pp. 660–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McCarthy, Daniel R., Power, Information Technology, and International Relations Theory (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McCarthy (ed.), Technology and World Politics: An Introduction.

5 Bull, Hedley, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics (3rd edn, Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2002Google Scholar.

6 Bull, The Anarchical Society, p. 71. Bull identifies the balance of power, the managerial role of great powers, diplomacy, international law, and war as the key institutions of international society that underpin the maintenance of international order. It should be noted that Barry Buzan has introduced the terminology of primary institutions and secondary institutions to highlight the constitutive and fundamental nature of the former, which is employed in this article. See Buzan, Barry, From International to World Society? English School Theory and the Social Structure of Globalisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the English School, inter alia, see Buzan, From International to World Society; Hurrell, Andrew, On Global Order: Power, Values and the Constitution of International Society (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Linklater, Andrew and Suganami, Hidemi, The English School of International Relations: A Contemporary Reassessment (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Navari, Cornelia and Green, Daniel M. (eds), Guide to the English School in International Studies (Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 2014)Google Scholar.

7 In this context, it is important to acknowledge that ideas about science, especially the appeal to nature in scientific aspects of civilisational standards were important along with ideas about technology. In many ways, then, technology emerged as the register through which scientific arguments about race were made. I would like to thank one anonymous reviewer for pointing this out. However, this article is primarily focused on ‘high-visibility technology’, which refers to the demonstrative effect of some technologies that allows for their celebration as great technological and engineering feats and consequently as a purported affirmation of self-proclaimed civilisational superiority and/or national technological prowess.

8 Said, Edward, Orientalism (New York, NY: Pantheon Books, 1978)Google Scholar.

9 Gong, Gerrit W., The Standard of ‘Civilisation’ in International Society (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1984)Google Scholar. See also Bowden, Brett, The Empire of Civilization: The Evolution of an Imperial Idea (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Buzan, Barry, ‘The “standard of civilisation” as an English School concept’, Millennium, 42:3 (2014), pp. 576–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Keene, Edward, Beyond the Anarchical Society: Grotius, Colonialism and Order in World Politics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Towns, Ann, ‘The status of women as a standard of “civilization”’, European Journal of International Relations, 15:4 (2009), pp. 681–706CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For an overview of the different uses of this concept, see Stroikos, Dimitrios, ‘Introduction: Rethinking the standard(s) of civilisation(s) in international relations’, Millennium, 42:3 (2014), pp. 546–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

10 McCarthy, ‘Conclusion: Technology and International Relations theory’, in McCarthy (ed.), Technology and World Politics, p. 225. Notably, some work has been done from an English School perspective that deals with particular cases related to the politics of technology. See, for example, Walker, William, A Perpetual Menace: Nuclear Weapons and International Order (London: Routledge, 2012)Google Scholar. See also Stroikos, Dimitrios, ‘Engineering world society? Scientists, internationalism, and the advent of the Space Age’, International Politics, 55:1 (2018), pp. 73–90CrossRefGoogle Scholar. But, to date, there has not been any effort to engage with the STS literature.

11 Musgrave, Paul and Nexon, Daniel H., ‘Defending hierarchy from the Moon to the Indian Ocean: Symbolic capital and political dominance in early modern China and the Cold War’, International Organization, 72:3 (2018), pp. 591–626CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

12 Buzan and Lawson, The Global Transformation; Mitzen, Jennifer, Power in Concert: The Nineteenth Century Origins of Global Governance (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

13 Kennedy, Andrew B., ‘Powerhouses or pretenders? Debating China's and India's emergence as technological powers’, The Pacific Review, 28:2 (2015), pp. 281–302CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

14 I am aware that there is an ongoing debate within STS regarding the relationship between science and technology. For a good overview of this debate, see Forman, Paul, ‘The primacy of science in modernity, of technology in postmodernity, and of ideology in the history of technology’, History and Technology, 23:1–2 (2007), pp. 1–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar. See also Hong, Sungook, ‘Historiographical layers in the relationship between science and technology’, History and Technology, 15:4 (1999), pp. 289–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Forman argues, rather controversially, that science became ‘subsumed under technology’ in the second half of the twentieth century.

15 Adas, Michael, Dominance by Design: Technological Imperatives and the America's Civilizing Mission (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2006), p. 12CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

16 Ibid., pp. 12–13. On this point, see also Channell, David F., A History of Technoscience: Erasing the Boundaries between Science and Technology (Abingdon: Routledge, 2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

17 Krause, Keith and Latham, Andrew, ‘Constructing non–proliferation and arms control: The norms of Western practice’, Contemporary Security Policy, 19:1 (1998), pp. 41–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Price, Richard, ‘A genealogy of the chemical weapons taboo’, International Organization, 49:1 (1995), pp. 73–103CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Tannenwald, Nina, ‘The nuclear taboo: The United States and the normative basis of nuclear non-use’, International Organization, 53:3 (1999), p. 437CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

18 Yao, Joanne, ‘“Conquest from barbarism”: The Danube Commission, international order and the control of nature as a Standard of Civilization’, European Journal of International Relations, 25:2 (2019), pp. 335–59CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

19 Buzan, ‘The “standard of civilisation”’; Gong, The Standard of ‘Civilisation’. On the ‘standard of civilisation’ and uneven and combined development, see Buzan and Lawson, The Global Transformation; and Anievas, Alex and Nisancioglu, Kerem, How the West Came to Rule: The Geopolitical Origins of Capitalism (London: Pluto Press, 2015), pp. 127, 134CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

20 Gong, The Standard of ‘Civilisation’. See also Anghie, Antony, Imperialism, Sovereignty and the Making of International Law (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)Google Scholar; and Simpson, Gerry J., Great Powers and Outlaw States: Unequal Sovereigns in the International Legal Order (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004), pp. 227–53CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

21 Gong, The Standard of ‘Civilisation’, pp. 6–14.

22 Buzan, ‘The “standard of civilisation”’.

23 Ibid., p. 583.

24 Okagaki, Tomoko T., The Logic of Conformity: Japan's Entry into International Society (Toronto: Toronto University Press, 2013), p. 117CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Gong, The Standard of ‘Civilisation’, pp. 63, 196–9.

25 Simpson, Great Powers and Outlaw States; See also Keene, Edward, of, ‘The standard “civilisation”’, the expansion thesis and the 19th-century international social space’, Millennium, 42:3 (2014), pp. 651–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

26 Hart, Roger, Imagined Civilizations: China, the West, and Their First Encounter (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2013), p. 35Google Scholar.

27 Adas, Michael, Machines as the Measure of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1989)Google Scholar.

28 Headrick, Daniel R., The Tools of Empire: Technology and European Imperialism in the Nineteenth Century (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1981)Google Scholar.

29 Pyenson, Lewis, Civilizing Mission: Exact Sciences and French Overseas Expansion, 1830–1940 (Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press, 1993)Google Scholar.

30 Adas, Machines, pp. 21–68.

31 On a similar point with regards to the status of women as an informal ‘standard of civilisation’, see Towns, ‘The status of women’, p. 694.

32 Adas, Machines, pp. 7, 224.

33 Mazower, Mark, Governing the World: The History of an Idea (London: Allen Lane, 2012), pp. 94–104Google Scholar.

34 Howland, Douglas, ‘An alternative mode of international order: The international administrative union in the nineteenth century’, Review of International Studies, 41:1 (2015), pp. 161–83CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

35 Marsden, Ben and Smith, Crosbie, Engineering Empires: A Cultural History of Technology in Nineteenth-Century Britain (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005), pp. 216, 231–2Google Scholar. See also Adas, Machines, pp. 221–36.

36 Somsen, Geert J., ‘A history of universalism: Conceptions of the internationality of science from the Enlightenment to the Cold War’, Minerva, 46 (2008), pp. 363–4CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

37 Hobson, John M., The Eastern Origins of Western Civilisation (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

38 Adas, Machines, p. 10.

39 Barrow, John, Travels in China (London: T. Cadel and W. Davies, 1804)Google Scholar.

40 On Barrow's background and the influence of his Travels in China, see Adas, Machines, pp. 178–83.

41 Barrow, Travels, p. 311.

42 Ibid., p. 355.

43 Adas, Machines, pp. 182–3.

44 Mill, James, History of British India, Vol. 2 (4th edn, London: James Madden and Co., 1848)Google Scholar.

45 Ibid., p. 99.

46 Ibid., pp. 100–01, 106.

47 Ibid., p. 220.

48 Adas, Machines, p. 171.

49 Suzuki, Shogo, Civilization and Empire: China and Japan's Encounter with European International Society (Abingdon: Routledge, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

50 Aydin, Cemil, The Politics of Anti-Westernism in Asia: Visions of World Order in Pan-Islamic and Pan-Asian Thought (New York, NY: Columbia University Press, 2007), pp. 71–82CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mishra, Pankaj, From the Ruins of Empire: The Revolt Against the West and the Remaking of Asia (London: Allen Lane, 2012), pp. 1–7Google Scholar.

51 Adas, Machines, pp. 357–65.

52 Kuo, Tingyee and Liu, Kwang-Ching, ‘Self-Strengthening: The pursuit of Western technology’, in Fairbank, John (ed.), The Cambridge History of China, Volume 10: Late Ch'ing, 1800–1911, Part 1 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1978), pp. 491–2CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

53 Zhang, Yongjin, ‘China's entry into international society: Beyond the standard of “civilization”’, Review of International Studies, 17:1 (1991), pp. 3–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

54 Spence, Jonathan D., The Search for Modern China (2nd edn, New York: W. W. Norton, 1999), p. 192Google Scholar.

55 Kuo and Liu, ‘Self-Strengthening’.

56 Elman, Benjamin A., On Their Own Terms: Science in China, 1550–1900 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 2005), p. 360CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

57 Teng, Ssu-yu and Fairbank, John K, China's Response to the West: A Documentary Survey, 1839–1923 (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1961), pp. 54, 73Google Scholar.

58 Elman, On Their Own Terms.

59 Teng and Fairbank, China's Response, p. 87. The point here, then, is not to espouse the deterministic view that if it were not for these impediments, technological development would occur naturally in China, but to draw attention to the importance of contingent and political factors. The same also applies to my following analysis of technological development in India.

60 Suzuki, Civilization and Empire.

61 Ibid., p. 101.

62 Ibid., pp. 89–113.

63 Ibid., pp. 93–4.

64 Kuhn, Philip A., Origins of the Modern Chinese State (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2002), p. 52Google Scholar.

65 Hughes, Christopher R., ‘The enduring function of the Substance/Essence (Ti/Yong) dichotomy in Chinese nationalism’, in Callahan, William A. and Barabantseva, Elena (eds), China Orders the World: Normative Soft Power and Foreign Policy (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2011), p. 119Google Scholar.

66 Ibid., p. 125.

67 Elshakry, Marwa, ‘When science became Western: Historiographical reflections’, Isis, 101:1 (2010), p. 100CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

68 Ibid., p. 102.

69 Elman, On Their Own Terms, pp. 397–8.

70 Schmid, Jon and Huang, Jonathan, ‘State adoption of transformative technology: Early railroad adoption in China and Japan’, International Studies Quarterly, 61:3 (2017), pp. 570–83Google Scholar. Schmid and Jonathan Huang make this argument in the context of discussing China's slow adoption of railways, but they also highlight the importance of cultural and civilisational factors in Chinese views about foreign technology and ideas in the nineteenth century.

71 Paine, S. C. M., The Sino-Japanese War of 1894–1895: Perceptions, Power and Primacy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003), pp. 18–19Google Scholar.

72 Elman, On Their Own Terms, pp. 398–9.

73 Chow, Tse-tung, The May Fourth Movement: Intellectual Revolution in Modern China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1960), p. 359CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

74 Mitter, Rana, A Bitter Revolution: China's Struggle with the Modern World (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004), p. 101Google Scholar.

75 Chow, The May Fourth Movement, pp. 359, 59.

76 Wang, Zuoyue, ‘Saving China through science: The science society of China, scientific nationalism, and civil society in Republican China’, Osiris, 17 (2002), pp. 291–322CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

77 Kirby, William C., ‘Technocratic organization and technological development in China: The nationalist experience and legacy, 1928–1953’, in Simon, Denis Fred and Goldman, Merle (eds), Science and Technology in Post-Mao China (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1989), p. 29Google Scholar.

78 See, for example, Arnold, David, The New Cambridge History of India: Science, Technology and Medicine in Colonial India. III-5 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kumar, Deepak, Science and the Raj: A Study of British India (2nd edn, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Prakash, Gyan, Another Reason: Science and the Imagination of Modern India (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

79 Prakash, Another Reason, p. 3; Arnold, The New Cambridge History of India, pp. 15, 22.

80 Prakash, Another Reason, p. 4.

81 Ibid., pp. 11, 159–70.

82 Headrick, Daniel R., The Tentacles of Progress: Technology Transfer in the Age of Imperialism, 1850–1940 (New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 1988), p. 64Google Scholar; Adas, Machines, pp. 223, 225.

83 Baber, Zaheer, The Science of Empire: Scientific Knowledge, Civilization, and Colonial Rule in India (Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 1996), pp. 184–212Google Scholar; Prakash, Another Reason, p. 4.

84 Adas, Machines, pp. 235–6.

85 Headrick, The Tentacles of Progress, p. 345.

86 Arnold, The New Cambridge History, pp. 12–14; Baber, The Science of Empire, pp. 251–2.

87 Baber, The Science of Empire, pp. 229–30.

88 Prakash, Another Reason, p. 7.

89 Ibid, pp. 7–11.

90 Chacko, Priya, ‘The search for a scientific temper: Nuclear technology and the ambivalence of India's postcolonial modernity’, Review of International Studies, 37:1 (2011), p. 186CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

91 Harrison, Carol E. and Johnson, Ann, ‘Introduction: Science and national identity’, Osiris, 24:1 (2009), pp. 1–14CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

92 Prakash, Another Reason, pp. 200–01.

93 Chacko, ‘The search for a scientific temper’.

94 Fidler, David P., ‘A kinder, gentler system or capitulations? International law, structural adjustment policies, and the standard of liberal, globalized civilization’, Texas International Law Journal, 35:3 (2000), pp. 387–413Google Scholar.

95 Donnelly, Jack, ‘Human rights: A new standard of civilization?’, International Affairs, 74:1 (1998), pp. 1–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

96 Gong, Gerrit W., ‘Standards of civilization today’, in Mozaffari, Mehdi (ed.), Globalization and Civilizations (London: Routledge, 2002), pp. 85–92Google Scholar.

97 Towns, ‘The status of women’.

98 Hobson, Christopher, ‘Democracy as civilisation’, Global Society, 22:1 (2008), pp. 75–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

99 Nicolaidis, Kalyspo, Vergerio, Claire, Onar, Nora Fisher, and Viehoff, Juri, ‘From metropolis to microcosmos: The EU's new standards of civilisation’, Millennium, 42:3 (2014), pp. 718–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Stivachtis, Yannis A., ‘Civilization and international society: The case of European Union expansion’, Contemporary Politics, 14:1 (2008), pp. 71–89CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

100 Kinsella, Helen M., The Image before the Weapon: A Critical History of the Distinction Combatant and Civilian (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Krause and Latham, ‘Constructing non–proliferation’, pp. 41–4; Mathur, Ritu, ‘The West and the rest: A civilizational mantra in arms control and disarmament?’, Contemporary Security Policy, 35:3 (2014), pp. 332–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Price, ‘A genealogy’; and Tannenwald, ‘The nuclear taboo’, p. 437.

101 Simpson, Great Powers, pp. 278–316; Bowden, The Empire of Civilization, pp. 17, 186, 190.

102 Gong, ‘Standards of civilization today’, p. 80.

103 Zarakol, Ayşe, After Defeat: How the East Learned to Live with the West (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011), p. 4Google Scholar.

104 Zhang, Xiaoming, ‘China in the conception of international society: The English School's engagements with China’, Review of International Studies, 37:2 (2011), pp. 763–86CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

105 Buzan, ‘The “standard of civilisation”’, p. 581.

106 Harrison and Johnson, ‘Introduction’, p. 3.

107 Rieger, Bernhard, Technology and Culture of Modernity in Britain and Germany, 1890–1945 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), pp. 224–30Google Scholar.

108 Bowden, The Empire of Civilization, p. 126.

109 Hecht, Gabrielle (ed.), Entangled Geographies: Empire and Technopolitics in the Global Cold War (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Oreskes, Naomi and Krige, John (eds), Science and Technology in the Global Cold War (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

110 Adas, Machines, pp. 402–03; Bowden, The Empire of Civilization, pp. 69–72.

111 Bowden, The Empire of Civilization, p. 186.

112 Buzan and Lawson, The Global Transformation, p. 185.

113 Gusterson, Hugh, ‘Nuclear weapons and the Other in the Western imagination’, Cultural Anthropology, 14:1 (1999), pp. 111–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

114 Biswas, Shampa, Nuclear Desire: Power and the Postcolonial Nuclear Order (Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press, 2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

115 See, for example, Fritzsche, Peter, A Nation of Fliers: German Aviation and the Popular Imagination (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1992)Google Scholar; Hecht, Gabrielle, The Radiance of France: Nuclear Power and National Identity after World War II (Cambridge: MIT Press, 2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Mitchell, Timothy, Rule by Experts: Egypt, Techno-politics, Modernity (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

116 Feigenbaum, Evan A., China's Techno-Warriors: National Security and Strategic Competition from the Nuclear to the Information Age (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2003)Google Scholar; and Cheung, Tai Ming, Fortifying China: The Struggle to Build a Modern Defense Economy (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 2009), pp. 237–41Google Scholar. For an insightful analysis of the importance of Chinese techno-nationalism as a composite ideology, see Hughes, Christopher R., Chinese Nationalism in the Global Era (Abingdon: Routledge, 2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar. On the original use of the concept of techno-nationalism, see Samuels, Richard J., Rich Nation, Strong Army: National Security and the Technological Transformation of Japan (Ithaca, NY: Cornel University Press, 1994)Google Scholar.

117 On China's continuing quest for wealth and power, see Schell, Orville and Delury, John, Wealth and Power: China's Long March to the Twenty-First Century (London: Little, Brown, 2013)Google Scholar.

118 Feigenbaum, China's Techno-Warriors, pp. 225–7; Cheung, Fortifying China, p. 237.

119 Elman, Benjamin A., ‘New directions in the history of modern science in China: Global science and comparative history’, Isis, 98:3 (2007), p. 523CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.

120 See, among others, Anderson, Robert S, Nucleus and Nation: Scientists, International Networks and Power in India (Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, 2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Phalkey, Jahnavi, Atomic State: Big Science in Twentieth-century India (Ranikhet: Permanent Black, 2013)Google Scholar.

121 Abraham, Itty, The Making of the Indian Atomic Bomb: Science, Secrecy and the Postcolonial State (London: Zed Books, 1998)Google Scholar; Chacko, ‘The search for a scientific temper’.

122 Siddiqi, Asif, ‘Making space for the nation: Satellite television, Indian scientific elites, and the Cold War’, Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africa and the Middle East, 35:1 (2015), pp. 35–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar.

123 For a recent overview of the research agenda of the English School, see Buzan, Barry and Schouenborg, Laust, Global International Society: A New Framework for Analysis (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar.