Chinese charm offensive and a bystander’s high hopes

Print Edition

User Rating: / 0
PoorBest 

Free for all

Friday, 03 February 2012

Author / Source : Asadullah Minhaz

Collapse of Pax Americana?
At the moment there is no disputing ‘China’s emergence as the globe’s most powerful economy’ in the future; there may only be debates on how fast it would happen.  However, the western researchers are rather troubled by the other aspect of the issue; will economic supremacy bring forth a change in the world order? More precisely, will China’s rise herald the collapse of Pax Americana?
In 2008 January issue of the Foreign Affairs, China’s ascent over the last decades was termed as ‘extraordinary’ by G. John Ikenberry. What concerned him most was looming threat of USA’s downfall as result. He even connected the phenomenon with the question of survival of the ‘Liberal System’.  Similar concerns have been echoed recently by another acclaimed weekly, the Economist, in a special issue on China (25th June 2011) titled, Rising Power, Anxious State.
Nonetheless, there may be an endeavour of seeing it right through the unbiased lenses.
If we want a lesson from history, Paul Kennedy’s works are valuable. Mr. Kennedy, a renowned historian, does good research on the rise and fall of the great powers where he predicts such downfall as an imminent outcome of the economic nosedive. Kennedy asserts that climbing to Great Power position is firmly related  to on-hand resources and economic resilience; military overstretch and a connected relative decline are the consistent threat faced by powers whose ambitions and security requirements are greater than their resource base can provide for.
According to Kennedy, the rise of China was apparent even in 1987, which was brought on by the priority of the "four modernizations" in Deng Xiaoping's plans for China —agriculture, industry, science and military deemphasizing the military at a time when the United States and the Soviet Union were emphasizing it. He holds that continued deficit spending, especially on military build-up, will be the single most important reason for decline of any Great Power. While discussing historical great powers, Kennedy even ignores military or naval supremacy stating that ‘they may not always have been the raison d'être of the new nations-states, but it certainly was their most expensive and pressing activity’. This assumption is contrary to the notion that the global stretch of Royal Navy made British Empire "the Empire on which the sun never sets", for about 200 years. However, even if we hold the notion true, a question arises: is it always the economic edge that determines the ascendency of a great power? Well, probably not always. Even with a declining economy, the USSR maintained the posture of one of the two superpowers for quite some time. Despite his ultimate demise, Hitler dominated historical events for about half a decade with sheer military supremacy. Some of the ‘developing’ countries are aspiring to become world powers only through their military and nuclear capability. And China itself is a ‘developing’ country too.
Some researchers also try to connect the rise and eventual downfall of global power as a natural phenomena or historic episode. They hold that the eras of Pax Romana and Pax Britannica have both passed into history, and now the world would witness the rapid decline of Pax Americana. History has its iron law regarding the rise and fall of great powers.  It is also seen that the decline of the USA in recent years has not merely occurred due to its decreasing economic, cultural, moral power but because of its over-reaching expansion, by keeping numerous military bases abroad from Europe to Africa, the Middle East and East Asia.  Some assert that over- reaching expansion was also the crucial factor that led to the fall of the Roman and the British Empires.
Former U.S. national security advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski recently indicates that the world power has shifted from the Atlantic to the Pacific. So, are we truly at the historic crossroad where we witness the decline and fall of American pre-eminence? Is China going to take over next?
Elements of Great/Global Power: Does China Fit In?
In order to assess if China has the potential to become a great power generating Pax Sinica, we may try to comprehend what it means by the term great power.
Great powers are considered to be the main actors of global affairs. Further than being merely 'great', or only 'super', they must now be 'global' and attain transnational competencies. In short, a global power needs to promote international order; possess formidable military capability; and engage effectively in transnational issues; over and above, deal successfully with transnational threats.
What made USA a great power is not her sheer military capability; rather a combination of economic and military prowess, stronger appeal of freedom, democracy and openness, diplomatic upper hand, dominating media, influencing culture, science and technological edge, so on and forth. For centuries, USA remained as a land of hope and aspiration for the people around the globe. USA dominated the world opinions more through softer elements that included everything from the charms of Marylyn Monroe to the political philosophy of Abraham Lincoln, ethos of Martin Luther King Jr to the poetic genius of Walt Whitman, Edison, Wright brothers, Walt Disney, Harvard, MIT, John Hopkins, The Times, Newsweek, CBS, McDonald, MGM and FOX... together they have made America the focal point of civilization.  USA presented the world with a metaphor for openness and freedom; became an educational, technological, medical and cultural hub for the rest of the world. The American Dream charmed people, a promise of the possibility of prosperity and success. The aspiration to have a life that is “better and richer and fuller for everyone, with opportunity for each according to ability or achievement" together with the proclamation that "all men are created equal" and that they are "endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable Rights" including "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" have been the philosophical cornerstone for nearly two third of the globe. USA’s moral and material ascendency invited her to be the world leader in two consecutive world wars and in subsequent global affairs. Whatever USA did, be it landing on the moon or making skyscrapers, became iconic.
Years before, some even predicted EU, not China, would be coming up as next superpower. But due to extended recession and debt crisis in the weaker economies of Europe, ‘Europe is about to blow’, says Time Magazine on a recent issue, quoting Kenneth Rogoff of Harvard University. EU even asks China to lend money and rescue Europe. The politico-economic entity of EU is fragile and at stake; perhaps not good enough to breed a global power. 
But can China become a viable alternative for the US?
For China to reach up to that level now, the time has perhaps not yet come. China undoubtedly has a rich culture, appealing ideology and is one of the very ancient civilizations. But China has long remained unexplored and ‘uninhabited’ behind the iron curtain.
China is now trying to secure respectable position in global media world. The English CCTV, Beijing Review and China Daily are making noteworthy progresses; but they still remain far behind in the ability of shaping a significant ‘market’ for themselves. China has announced deep space programmes as well, having already done the spacewalk and space docking mission in November 2011. China's space station is scheduled to open around 2020. The same year, the International Space Station is destined to close due to a funding crisis. China will also secure space leadership by then, opine some NASA experts. Fortunate for China, she is also enormously aided by globalisation and to some extent by the Chinese Diaspora.
However, while for USA, vibrant private initiatives have mostly shaped its image, for China, the state machineries are major movers, with which it may be too difficult to make significant progress in the long run. China also confronts the allegation of human rights violations. This is certainly a bar to China’s desired cognitive authority, which should be an essential part of her global dominance. Some even assert that an economic nosedive in USA and the consumer cutback will affect China as well, since Chinese economy has an export oriented growth. But China has a growing middle class consumer group and also an enormous endeavour to enhance business ties with South/ Latin America, Europe, and for that matter, the rest of the globe.  Given the assumption that China makes major revamps in her socio-political system, opening up more – there are reasonable predictions that China will not replace USA as superpower in near future, not before at least 2070. One study identifies, “Taking nations as basic comparison units, the status of China's comprehensive power already ranks second in the world, but it remains at the second echelon compared to the US superpower status”.

Bystander’s Chances: Points to Ponder
There are countries where internal dynamics and challenges are so pressing that the fruits of global transformations can hardly be ‘harvested’. On most occasions, least developed or developing countries mostly hang around as spectators in world affairs or become a pawn to power politics. This is more applicable to the countries enduring colonial rule for centuries and thereafter coming out as independent states with fragile governance system, deep political divisions and poor economic infrastructures. No matter what the theoreticians of ‘Post Colonialism’ would suggest, colonial legacy has been ‘adhesively unavoidable’ for the most.  Countries with a past track record of long colonial rule inherit chaotic governance systems which are too uncreative to be relevant for contemporary times. The decision making also suffers from bureaucratic bottlenecks and is mostly ‘reactive’. Of all these realities, inheritance of poor governance prohibits creativity and novelty; this, together with unimaginative leadership inhibits any promising changes to come by. With the exception of, perhaps, one or two examples like Singapore, such countries always continued aftermath of whatever the colonial masters had left behind. The colonial curse is like a vicious cycle from where it is difficult to extricate and probably none would understand that better than Zimbabwe or few other African Nations.
Perhaps it will not be undue to term these countries as ‘Bystanders’ in global businesses; they keep waiting for a train to come for them but misses the right one at the right time. Some of these countries (like Bangladesh) may make segmented noteworthy progresses due to vibrant private sectors, but they need unanimous recognition and persuasion of national interests under a long term policy framework.  Change in world order would certainly bear something for the Bystanders as well.
Whether or not China outsmarts USA and becomes the exclusive super power is debatable; but China would, for certain, be a major ‘mover and shaker’ of global affairs in the future. With her growing prosperity, China will continue to emit influence, be a stake holder and shape events.  History shows that the rise of a great power brings about notable changes to geopolitics. China’s rise may also initiate opportunities for smaller nations or for her neighbours, as already identified by some of the ASEAN nations. Even with the conflicting national interest issue over the claim of the South China Sea, Philippines and Indonesia have recognized what China may offer in terms of investment and employment opportunities. Cities like Shanghai and Guangzhou are turning into global education, tourism and medical hubs; drawing ‘tens of thousands’ of talents from all over the world. With the upgrading of living standards and eventual pay hike, China needs to outsource or relocate some of her production facilities for cheaper labour as already done to countries like Vietnam. China is longing for energy sources, port facilities and greater connectivity; Myanmar and Pakistan have offered some of these. China also needs enormous diplomatic support, with a good number of countries rallying behind her. China is an emerging consumer market as well; already it has offered some trade subsidies to some of the least developed countries. With China aspiring to rise, there are good opportunities for others. China identifies her rise to be ‘peaceful’ and does not insist on spreading hegemony rather attempts to earn confidence.
This reflects that even without being a ‘client state’ or ‘hedging against’ China, countries like Bangladesh may benefit by gathering diplomatic support, creating  trade opportunities, infrastructural development and voicing support for ‘do or die’ issues like water sharing, ecological concessions etc. There are good opportunities for skilled human resources’ employment, especially in education sector.  China would now trade ‘assistance’ for ‘goodwill’ and try to buy more and more ‘relevance’ in the world order.
‘Learn from China’
Given the reality of overall socio-politico-economic environment of China - an authoritarian rule and in a predominantly centralised economic system - one would wonder how the high growth indexes were achieved in such a short span of time. Many of the theoreticians, mostly the proponents of capitalism and free market economies, are still sceptical about China’s solid rise; some still term it to be ‘short-term’ achievement and predict a major collapse in the near future. However, it is important to evaluate how China ‘made it through’ amid several crucial challenges.
When China started with the communist regime in 1949, it could not secure the economic liberty of the ‘proletariat’ right away. Mao Ze Dong’s ‘Great Leap Forward’ and ‘Cultural Revolution’ caused further economic setbacks. It was Deng’s visionary perception of the reality and gradual openness to mixed economy that saved China from a USSR like collapse. Deng did not mind crushing Tiananmen uprising with iron fist; prudently identifying that to be ‘untimely’.  Deng’s frequent interactions with world leaders widened his vision and he mastered a fine blend of control and openness that brilliantly suited Chinese approach. 
The Chinese rise and development sustained amid the challenges of heavy population, growing unemployment, food shortages and a dire need to uphold military status quo. China greatly reformed both agricultural and industrial sectors, taking pragmatic steps that encouraged more and more private enterprises. But in the process, it had to endure criticism and pressure from the west, face military quandaries with some of the neighbours and tackle a great famine. However, China does maintain censorship and restriction on open media, internet and freedom of speech and expression; though ostensibly, Chinese people are not much worried about that. One evaluation shows that for a greater cause of stability and sustained progress, majority of the Chinese people do not mind accepting some ‘restrictions’. However they do believe that things will get better and easier sometime in the future.
For a bystander country, the China story leaves behind definite learning tracks and interesting insights. It perhaps signifies the ways to deal concurrently with resource scarcity and longing for development. Countries with limited resource may not allow absolute laissez faire, so that the ‘governance’ is not a hostage to the wrongdoers. We frequently see the deceitful rampant groupings of traders, dealers, brokers or transport owners in these countries and they create immense pressure on governments to settle to their terms; here group interests prevail over common interests and state machinery can exert simply limited control. Dr. Mahathir Mohammad’s recent propagation for the “need to become ‘less democratic’ in order to achieve enhanced development” is worth noting.
The Chinese way of long-standing one party rule has also been characterised as an important catalyst for sustained economic development. A study identifies that in many of the contemporary  economic  success stories of the world, a Dominant Party Authoritarian Regime (DPAR) or De facto One Party Regime reigned; examples are Malaysia, Singapore, Taiwan, South Africa so on and so forth.  This may suggest the need for political unison in preference to a need for political competition in developing/underdeveloped countries.
Chinese ways of benign strategy can be divided in consecutive and overlapping stages like quiet build up, create ally, and enlarge and broaden voices. This could perhaps be another important learning track for countries aspiring to move forward.
Finally, China displays the need for loyal, motivated and disciplined society in order to pursue development goals. Deng’s constructive reforms were often challenged and criticised; he undertook a massive Southern Tour across the China to rally people behind him. It shows that, even in a totalitarian regime, the need for populous support and unity cannot be overemphasized. 
Epilogue
Hitherto, China’s charm moves have worked out convincingly – often reiterating  that she simply longs for a peaceful rise, never intending a power race with USA, advocates multipolarity, avoids fractious issues and prefers benignity to harness international support. And the world believes her, more or less. Here is where China has an edge, unlike USA or former USSR, her global initiatives have not generated whispers of ‘hidden desires’; China has indeed secured a moral ascendency.  Even with a totalitarian regime and a closed political system, China now draws tremendous attention from the world community. With hundreds of traders, scholars, media workers, scientists, politicians.....all signing up for a ‘gold rush’, every road literally leads to China today.
If China is able to maintain the ‘righteous’ posture, with justness and fairness embedded in, no matter whether she makes a military superpower or not, China can certainly become the Super Power of Global Conscience. The tormented world may need one at the moment.
Question is, can China make it happen?
Concluded