Japan’s overall AI capability ranks in the world’s second tier. Nevertheless, through a structured science and technology diplomacy approach, it has effectively enhanced its international influence in this field by employing three strategies: institutional participation, discourse construction, and practice sharing. At the institutional level, Japan has actively promoted the “alignment” of AI governance principles among the OECD, the G7, and the G20 and has introduced the “Data Free Flow with Trust” (DFFT) framework as a supporting mechanism for AI governance. At the discourse level, Japan prepares draft texts for international AI discussions to highlight its national interests in international rule-making. At the practical level, Japan shares with the international community its governance practices characterized by a “soft law paradigm” and “agile governance,” thereby attracting international recognition. Through the interaction among these three approaches, Japan has shaped its international image as an “active actor” in global AI governance, helping to strengthen its international discursive power.

Constructing a systematic and multi-layered framework for overseas security provision is conducive to advancing national security capacity building. Owing to their resource endowments and professional operational advantages, social organizations are capable of compensating for the shortcomings of China’s overseas security provision in terms of coverage and resource allocation, making them indispensable actors in improving overseas security mechanisms. As for participation advantages, social organizations can, on the one hand, expand the scale of overseas security provision through symbolic capital, social capital, and knowledge capital; on the other hand, they can enhance security provision through social advocacy and professional public services, thereby addressing the limitations of the “government-market” dual structure in terms of capability boundaries and allocation efficiency. Regarding pathway design, social organizations should follow three approaches-integration, linkage, and symbiosis-to constructively embed themselves into the national overseas security governance system, build communication bridges among multiple actors, and promote inclusive benefits for all parties. The Global Environmental Institute’s participation in the protection of China’s overseas investment from 2005 to 2024 demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of the above pathway design. Looking ahead, China should incorporate social organizations into the overall planning of its overseas security mechanisms and, through diversified collaborative governance, establish a systematic and efficient overseas security provision system supported by the discipline of national security studies.

The Chinese nation has accumulated rich resources of thought on national security throughout its history. Among these, Chen Liang, a representative figure of the “Yongkang School” in the Southern Song Dynasty, proposed a series of substantive ideas on national security based on his profound insight into the crises of his era. His theory of governance, encapsulated in the maxim “establish the fundamental principles to rectify discipline, and define the grand strategy to enable adaptive actions,” was founded on an understanding of the systematic security crises in the early Southern Song, emphasizing the foundational role of core principles and overarching strategy. His view of rule of law, expressed as “acting with utmost impartiality in accordance with the times,” originated from reflection on and critique of the limitations of the Song Dynasty’s legal institutions, embodying the requirement to unify principled rigor with flexibility. His practical character, centered on the idea that “Tao is manifested in Shi (concrete affairs)”, was fully demonstrated in his famous debate with Zhu Xi on “The Kingly Way” versus “The Hegemonic Way” and Yi (Righteousness) versus Li (Utility), which were reflected in his ontology of “the unity of Tao and Shi”, his methodology advocating for “the concurrent practice of Yi and Li and the integrated application of the Kingly Way and the Hegemonic Way,” and his subjectivity characterized by “responsibility and broad-mindedness.” Chen Liang’s thought on national security, underpinned by his “Practical Statecraft” provides profound historical and cultural support for constructing an autonomous knowledge system of Chinese national security studies.