SFeDu
of.211, Gorgoko St., 88 
Rostov-on-Don
Russia
344002
+7 (863) 250-59-54
This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
te@sfedu.ru

TERRA ECONOMICUS

  • Home
  • Issues
  • 2025
  • No 2
  • A constructivist approach to Vietnam strategy amid U.S. – China geoeconomic rivalry: The case of BRI and IPEF

A constructivist approach to Vietnam strategy amid U.S. – China geoeconomic rivalry: The case of BRI and IPEF


TERRA ECONOMICUS, Vol. 23, No 2,

Citation: Nguyen N.T., Nguyen A.Q., Tran B.L.X., Tran H.X. (2025). A constructivist approach to Vietnam strategy amid U.S. – China geoeconomic rivalry: The case of BRI and IPEF. Terra Economicus 23(2), 126–136. DOI: 10.18522/2073-6606-2025-23-2-126-136

The critical position of Southeast Asia in general and Vietnam in particular makes them the main “battlefield” of the U.S. – China influence rivalry in the Southeast Asia region. The balancing approach of Vietnam to the superpower rivalry, especially in the context of the United States and China’s geo-economic rivalry in the region, is usually considered the “walking in the tightrope”. The approach of Vietnam is considered a balancing strategy to leverage the benefit from as well as to serve as a hedging strategy to counter any risk from both powers. However, this explanation does not capture the dynamic behind this strategy. Moreover, the ambiguous motivation such as “national interest” is not sufficient in elaborating the dynamic in Vietnam’s unique foreign policy dynamic. As a result, this paper focuses on investigating what is the momentum of Vietnamese strategy through the case of rivalry between China and the United States in geoeconomic terms, specifically the clash between the Chinese Belt Road Initiatives (BRI) and US Indo-Pacific Economic Framework for Prosperity (IPEF) in the region. By exploring Vietnam’s approach through the lens of constructivism, the paper argues that the distinctive approach in Vietnam foreign policy in navigating the great power competition is heavily rooted in the nation’s historic experience, identity, and regional norm. These findings show that Vietnam’s behavior is not only determined by the national interest but also by the constructivist elements as mentioned above.

Keywords: Vietnam foreign policy; constructivism; BRI; IPEF; great power rivalry; U.S.-China economic competition
Funding: This research is funded by University of Social Sciences & Humanities, Vietnam National University Ho Chi Minh City under grant number NCM2024-01.
JEL codes: F52, F53


References:
  • Abadi, F., Al-Fadhat, F. (2023). The influence of Indo-Pacific Economic Framework on peace stability in the ASEAN Region. Global Strategis, 17(1), 33–50.
  • Acharya, A. (2000). Ethnocentrism and emancipatory IR theory. In: Arnold, S., Bier, J. (eds.) Displacing Security. Toronto: Centre for International and Security Studies, York University.
  • Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism. International Organization, 58(2), 239–275.
  • Acharya, A., Stubbs, R. (2006). Theorizing Southeast Asian relations: An introduction. The Pacific Review, 19(2), 125–134.
  • Ascensão, F., Fahrig, L., Clevenger, A. et al. (2018). Environmental challenges for the Belt and Road Initiative. Nature Sustainability, 1(5), 206–209.
  • Ashizawa, K. (2008). When identity matters: State identity, regional institution-building, and Japanese foreign policy. International Studies Review, 10(3), 571–598.
  • Beresford, M., Phong, D. (2000). Past, present and future. In: Economic Transition in Vietnam: Trade and Aid in the Demise of a Centrally Planned Economy. Massachusetts & Gloucestershire: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 149–155.
  • Björkdahl, A. (2002). Norms in international relations: Some conceptual and methodological reflections. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 15(1), 9–23.
  • Bull, H. (1995). The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics. London: Macmillan Publishers.
  • Cha, V. (2023). Collective resilience: Deterring China’s weaponization of economic interdependence. International Security, 48(1), 91–124.
  • Chang, C., Yang, A. (2020). Weaponized interdependence: China’s economic statecraft and social penetration against Taiwan. Orbis, 64(2), 312–333.
  • Cook, M. (2018). Southeast Asia’s developing divide. In: Rozman, G., Liow, J. (eds.) International Relations and Asia’s Southern Tier: ASEAN, Australia and India. Singapore: Springer, pp. 63–76.
  • Do, T. (2021). Vietnam and China: ideological bedfellows, strange dreamers. Journal of Contemporary East Asia Studies, 10(2), 162–182.
  • Do, T. (2022). Vietnam’s emergence as a middle power in Asia: Unfolding the power–knowledge nexus. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 41(2), 279–302.
  • Fierke, K. (2016). Constructivism. In: Dunne, T., Kurki, M., Smith, S. (eds.) International Relations Theories: Discipline and Diversity. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 161–178.
  • Frega, R. (2020). Democracy and the limits of political realism. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 23(4), 468–494.
  • Gertz, G., Evers, M. (2020). Geoeconomic competition: Will state capitalism win? The Washington Quarterly, 43(2), 117–136.
  • Hoffmann, M. (2010). Norms and social constructivism in international relations. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
  • Hopf, T. (1998). The promise of constructivism in international relations theory. International Security, 23(1), 171–200.
  • Huynh, T. S. (2022, June 13). Vietnam Eyes Pragmatic Gains from the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2022/06/vietnam-eyes-pragmatic-gains-from-the-indo-pacific-economic-framework/
  • Jiang, F. (2022). An analysis of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework (IPEF): Essence, impacts and prospects. East Asian Affairs, 2(2), 1–21.
  • Jung, H. (2019). The evolution of social constructivism in political science: Past to present. Sage Open, 9(1).
  • Kelemen, P. (1984). Soviet strategy in Southeast Asia: The Vietnam factor. Asian Survey, 24(3), 335–348.
  • Kerkvliet, B. (2019). Speaking Out in Vietnam: Public Political Criticism in a Communist Party–Ruled Nation. New York: Cornell University Press.
  • Le, D. (2021). A multi-level approach to Vietnam foreign policy: From security preoccupation to middle power role. Strategic Analysis, 45(4), 321–335.
  • Le, H. (2013). Vietnam’s hedging strategy against China since normalization. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 35(3), 333–368.
  • Ma, X., Kang, D. (2023). Why Vietnam is not balancing China: Vietnamese security priorities and the dynamics in Sino-Vietnam relations. Journal of East Asian Studies, 23(3), 363–386.
  • Marston, H. (2024). Navigating great power competition: A neoclassical realist view of hedging. International Relations of the Asia-Pacific, 24(1), 29–63.
  • Murphy, A. (2017). Great power rivalries, domestic politics and Southeast Asian foreign policy: Exploring the linkages. Asian Security, 13(3), 165–182.
  • Nguyễn, A. (2023). The South China Sea for China, the United States, and what choice for Vietnam. Cogent Social Sciences, 9(1). DOI: 10.1080/23311886.2023.2204570
  • Nguyen, A. (2021). Three structures of Vietnam – China relations: A view from the structural constructivist theory. East Asia, 38(2), 123–138.
  • Nguyen, C. (2022). Dancing between giants: Vietnam’s position within U.S. – China strategic competition. In: Kou, C.-W., Huang, C.-C., Job, B. (eds.) The Strategic Options of Middle Powers in the Asia-Pacific. London: Routledge, pp. 192–212.
  • Nguyen, M., Chelabi, K., Anjum, S. et al. (2024). US-China global competition and dilemma for Vietnam’s strategic choices in the South China Sea conflict. Heritage and Sustainable Development, 6(1), 349–364.
  • Nguyen, N. (2010). Vietnamese foreign policy since Doi Moi: The dialectic of power and identity. Doctoral dissertation, University of New South Wales. https://unsworks.unsw.edu.au/entities/publication/7594d7ce-48d6-4384-ba25-510aba42a2a5
  • Nguyen, T., Nguyen, P. (2021). The reception and implementation of the Belt and Road Initiative in Vietnam. Strategic Analysis, 45(2), 128–143.
  • Nguyen, V. (2015). Vietnam foreign policy: The rationale of its instruments towards China in solving South China Sea disputes since HD-981 incident in 2014. Master Thesis, International Institute of Social Studies (ISS).
  • Nguyen, V. (2002). Vietnam – ASEAN co-operation after the Cold War and the continued search for a theoretical framework. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 24(1), 106–120.
  • Nguyen, V. (2007a). Testing the institutionalist approach. In: Balme, S., Sidel, M. (eds.) Vietnam’s New Order: International Perspectives on the State and Reform in Vietnam. New York: Palgrave Macmillan US, pp. 51–70.
  • Nguyen, V. (2007b). Vietnam’s membership of ASEAN: A constructivist interpretation. Contemporary Southeast Asia, 29(3), 483–505.
  • Parks, B., Malik, A., Escobar, B. et al. (2023). Belt and Road Reboot: Beijing’s Bid to De-Risk Its Global Infrastructure Initiative. Virginia: AidData at William & Mary.
  • Pham, S., Ba, A. (2021). Vietnam’s cautious response to China’s Belt and Road Initiative: The imperatives of domestic legitimation. Asian Perspective, 45(4), 683–708.
  • Phan, X. (2024). Vietnam’s hedging amid U.S.-China Mekong rivalry: Risk management under uncertainties. Pacific Review. Advance online publication. DOI: 10.1080/09512748.2024.2425347
  • Raine, S., le Mière, C. (2013). Chapter three: Southeast Asia – Between emerging great-power rivalry. Adelphi Series, 53(436–437), 105–150.
  • Rana, P., Ji, X. (2020a). BRI and Southeast Asia. In: China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Singapore: Springer, pp. 93–111.
  • Rana, P., Ji, X. (2020b). China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Introduction and overview. In: China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Impacts on Asia and Policy Agenda. Singapore: Springer, pp. 1–23.
  • Reus-Smit, C. (2013). Constructivism. In: Burchill, S., Linklater, A. (eds.) Theories of International Relations. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 217–240.
  • Shang, H. (2019). What is the Belt and Road Initiative? In: The Belt and Road Initiative: Key Concepts. Singapore: Springer, pp. 1–25.
  • Son, B. (2020). Doi Moi and Vietnamese threat perception of Chinese economic growth. Japanese Journal of Political Science, 21(4), 179–193.
  • Soong, J.-J. (2023). The political economy of Asian states and their development strategies under USA-China power rivalry: Conducting hedging strategy on triangular relation and operation. The Chinese Economy, 56(4), 245–255.
  • Tajfel, H. (1981). Human Groups and Social Categories: Studies in Social Psychology. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Thayer, C. (2017). Vietnam’s foreign policy in an era of rising sino-US competition and increasing domestic political influence. Asian Security, 13(3), 183–199.
  • Toropchin, G. (2024). Theorising foreign policy and IR in Vietnam: A case for a Non-Western IR? The Russian Journal of Vietnamese Studies, 7(4), 5–14.
  • Trần, B., Nguyễn Anh, C., Đinh Trần, Y. (2024). Challenges for Vietnam in protecting South China Sea sovereignty and interests. Cogent Social Sciences, 10(1), 2401629.
  • Trinh, V., Ho, D. (2024). Vietnam’s response to the US Indo-Pacific strategy in the context of a rising China. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 43(1), 120–147.
  • Villacorta, W. (2020). Colonial legacy in the development of nation-states in Southeast Asia. In: Hösle, V., Sorondo, M., Zamagni, S. (eds.) Nation, State, Nation-State. Vatican: The Pontifical Academy of Social Sciences – Libreria Editrice Vaticana, pp. 259–268.
  • Vu, V.-H., Soong, J.-J., Nguyen, K.-N. (2022). Vietnam’s perceptions and strategies toward China’s Belt and Road Initiative expansion: Hedging with resisting. The Chinese Economy, 54(1), 56–68.
  • Vu, V.-H., Soong, J.-J., Nguyen, K.-N. (2023). The political economy of Vietnam and its development strategy under China–USA power rivalry and hegemonic competition: Hedging for survival. The Chinese Economy, 56(4), 256–270.
  • Vucetic, S. (2017). Identity and foreign policy. In: Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Politics. Oxford University Press.
  • Vuving, A. (2004). The two-headed grand strategy: Vietnamese foreign policy since Doi Moi. In: Vietnam Update 2004: Strategic and Foreign Relations. Singapore: The ISEAS-Yusof Ishak Institute.
  • Wendt, A. (1992). Anarchy is what States make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization, 46(2), 391–425.
  • Wendt, A. (1994). Collective Identity Formation and the International State. The American Political Science Review, 88(2), 384–396.
  • Wendt, A. (2012). Social Theory of International Politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
  • Williams, B., Manyin, M., Fefer, R. (2022). Biden Administration Plans for an Indo-Pacific Economic Framework. Washington, D.C.: Congressional Research Service.
  • Wu, X., Valesco, J. (2024). Navigating the Indo-Pacific: Vietnam’s hedging strategies amid the geopolitical rivalry between China and the United States. Asian Perspective, 48(1), 95–118.
  • Yoshimatsu, H. (2023). ASEAN and great power rivalry in regionalism: From East Asia to the Indo-Pacific. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 42(1), 25–44.

Publisher: Southern Federal University
ISSN: 2073-6606