Description
This paper provides a comparative analysis of Sino-Lithuanian and Sino-Czech relations to address the following question: why did Lithuania leave what was originally known as the 16+1 framework of cooperation between China and Central and Eastern Europe, while Czechia did not? Existing literature emphasises the agency of Lithuanian and Czech political elites, but this perspective does not fully explain the divergence in the two states’ foreign policy decisions regarding participation in the 16+1. To fill this gap, the study examines the broader geo-economic structures that both constrain and enable such agency, with a particular focus on the countries’ positions in Germany-CEE-China production networks and automotive value chains. The predominant focus is on structure-related factors that link the study’s independent variable (i.e., a state’s position within the core/semi-periphery/periphery of global value chains) to its dependent variable (i.e., a specific foreign policy decision). At the same time, the study accounts for differences in foreign policy outcomes that cannot be explained solely by structural factors.
A major contribution to the theme of the BISA 2026 conference lies in the paper’s attempt to bridge academic and policy research, with the paper being based on both primary and secondary data collected, analysed and discussed as part of the author’s policy work. The author believes that a greater engagement with major topics, methods and approaches within the policy sphere are needed to keep the IR discipline relevant for current and future global challenges.
