The US preoccupation with Iraq and global terrorism has given China an ideal opportunity to expand its role. In Southeast Asia it has forged a free-trade agreement with ASEAN. It has also signed a "Strategic Partnership" agreement with the regional organization. Although the partnership is supposedly "non-aligned, non-military and non-exclusive," it has a wide scope to cover almost anything and everything. For instance, it calls for cooperation in "politics, economy, social affairs, security and regional affairs."
On the surface, China's regional diplomacy is not directed against the US. Indeed, according to Vice Premier Qian Qichen (
First, by enlarging its political and economic space in the region through multilateral forums, Beijing will make it increasingly difficult for Washington to enlist regional support against China in the future.
Second, by virtue of its membership and or cooperation in the regional forums, it would have assured itself a seat in the conduct of regional affairs. And because of its political and economic weight, it will have a leading, if not determining, role.
In the longer run, China has a larger ambition of forging and leading an East Asian community. As a Chinese diplomat has put it, "China sees its integration with Southeast Asia as part of the East Asia pact." He added: "If you look at the world today, you see Europe with its integration having grown for many years now. And you look at North America and NAFTA. Look at Southeast Asia, we still lack this."
Beijing, though, makes it sound like it is doing it for Asia's common good. But the real objective is to establish China's pre-eminence. Vice Foreign Minister Wang Yi (王毅), blurted it out some time ago when he told China Daily that regional economic cooperation "will serve as a helpful trial and practice of China's new security concept featuring comprehensive, common and cooperative security."
Interestingly, there is a regional audience for the new Chinese initiative for regional integration. Mari Pangestu, an Indonesian economist has put it this way: "The growth of China led to a growing realization that the region could form a large and dynamic economic bloc ? and seek a more effective voice in the global arena hitherto dominated by Western interests."
China's charm diplomacy continues to reinforce this sense. Speaking at an Asian forum last year, Premier Wen Jiabao (
Whatever China's own agenda, this kind of charm offensive appears a welcome contrast in the region to the US policy of making terrorism the litmus test of all international relationships. China is, therefore, emerging as a benign power. As a Thai defense analyst has said, "China seems to become more and more of an attractive option," especially when it is increasingly projected as an economic powerhouse.
In reality China is recreating imperial Japan's East Asia Co-prosperity Sphere of the 1930s and 1940s. Like Japan at the time, China too feels the need for assured markets and raw materials to sustain its economic growth and project power. But in today's world, it cannot follow the ways of the old empires to expand territorially.
Fu Ying, China's new ambassador in Australia, has sought to put it in perspective in an interview. She said, "There is a fear about the future orientation of Chinese foreign policy. It's not surprising, because in world history many big powers rose and caused earthquakes. But I think China is going to be different, because the world has changed. It is not like in the past when powers had to expand territorially in order to get markets.?"
Therefore, Beijing will do it differently by forging one big happy East Asian community. It will include Southeast and Northeast Asia with China at the center. It will be like the old Middle Kingdom all over again with its modern version of tributary Asian states providing easy access to their markets and materials.
China also has a place for Japan and Korea in its long-term plan. Japan, though, might be a problem because: one, it is part of the US security system and two, it is a regional political and economic rival. But that might not be an insurmountable problem were Japan to feel marginalized from an Asian initiative. It might then want to be inside the Asian club If everything were to work according to the Chinese script, the US might find itself politically eased out of the Asia-Pacific region over a period of time.
As it is, things are not looking too good for the US. It is knee-eep in the Iraqi quagmire, notwithstanding the transfer of sovereignty routine. Its "imperial overstretch" is helping China to spread its tentacles further into Asia at US cost. James Steinberg, a foreign policy analyst at the US' Brookings Institution, regards this "as a zero-sum game." In his view, "If their [China's] power is greater, it diminishes ours. If [regional] countries have relations with China, they'll do less to help us. There will be less support on US bases" and so on.
China obviously has grandiose plans for its great power role, but it is not always that simple and neat. Some of its neighbors are not likely to take kindly to China's expanding role. They will, therefore, always welcome a US presence in the region to balance or deter China. Besides, China has a long way to go to replace the US as the regional and or global economic powerhouse. Equally, as the world's second-largest economy, Japan will not be easily subsumed into any Chinese grand plan.
China's biggest problem is its archaic Marxist-Leninist political system. The deeply embedded contradiction between its relatively open economy and closed political system (already dead in its Soviet homeland) is akin to a superstructure built on a sandy foundation. There is no knowing how long it will last. And when it does crumble, the country will become preoccupied with its internal problems.
Already, China is said to be racked with a number of small and big protests in its rural and regional backyard. All China's initiatives abroad are, therefore, hostage to a flawed political system at home.
Sushil Seth is a freelance writer based in Sydney.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS