Threat of Rising Powers: China and India?
Photo from China Daily website. http://www1.chinadaily.com.cn/
Start with US-China. Then, discuss US-India if time remains.
Some contrasts about the US and China to start our discussion:
SPACE: In October 2003 China launched its first manned space mission. It has a bold plan for space exploration that includes trips to the moon, Mars, and Venus, as well as a space station. In February 2003, the US experienced the destruction on its Shuttle flight, Columbia, with the loss of all those on board. In 2011, the US wound up its space shuttle program (PT editorial comment: sniff sniff).
POPULATION: China has a population of more than 1.3 billion people. The US has just 300 million.
ECONOMY: The Chinese economy is weathering the current economic crisis much better than the US. In fact, it is Chinese purchases of Treasury bonds are vital in financing the US debt. China's economy is now the second largest in the world. The US remains the largest economy, but as early as 2020, according to some estimates, the Chinese economy may surpass the US economy.
OTHER SUPERLATIVES FOR CHINA: world's longest high-speed rail network, longest sea-crossing bridge, largest airport terminal, biggest hydroelectric project, five of the top ten tallest skyscrapers in the world part of Greater China, including Taiwan (US has one). China just tested its first aircraft carrier and has developed its own stealth fighter, both to be operational within a few years (2012 and 2018, respectively).
DIPLOMACY: When President Obama visited China in November 2009, many commented that the power position of the US and China had changed, with the US needing more from China than China needs from us.
WAY UP, WAY DOWN? China is historically aggrieved ("century of humiliations:" spheres of influence, territorial concessions, broken and divided, extraterritoriality by West, then invasion by Japan). Seeks pride and recognition (Olympics-"we've arrived"). One of the world's great civilizations. The US has perhaps passed the pinnacle of its power. It won the Cold War and attained a unipolar moment, but it's got a sluggish economy and a big debt.
Have the tides turned? Students of the rise and fall of civilizations have observed that no civilization stays on top forever. Is the time of the US past and the time of China just dawning?
We will consider today whether China represents a looming threat to the US and the international community (are these the same thing?). The contrasts at the outset are meant to illuminate in broad brush strokes the nature of the different positions of the US and China today. We will see that straight line projections from today to tomorrow are not easy, however.
China and India rising powers
Large populations (1 billion +), can work for you or against you.
Growing economies, weathered crisis well, outsourcing, high-tech.
Historically great civilizations (glow of Chinese culture, influence of Indian mathematics and philosophy/religion).
Historically gigantic economies.
Historically great regional powers (Qing, Mughals).
Spending more on military (August 2011, China launches aircraft carrier), both have nuclear weapons.
Playing greater roles in world affairs (G-20, BRIC, climate diplomacy).
Is China a threat to the US and the international system?
Yes, China is a threat.
"Uneven development thesis"--rising power presents challenges to the international system regardless of whether it intends to or not. Difficulty of integrating Germany (two world wars) and Japan.
China just too big. No power that big, growing that quickly in world history. How can the international system be expected to capture aspirations of this new great power?
Realist answer--structure of anarchy in the international system and need of states to pursue power and national interest will push the US and China into conflict. Unavoidable.
Contrasting interests. Will the US trade Los Angeles, reachable by Chinese missiles, for Taiwan? Los Angeles for Taiwan threat was made by Chinese general Xiong Guangkai during mid-90s Taiwan Straits Crisis.
Trying to conceal capabilities. Acts like friendly global power, until . . .. See Deng Xiaoping's 28 character guidance on foreign policy: "(1) lengjing guancha, observe and analyze developments calmly; (2) chenzhuo yingfu, deal with changes patiently and confidently; (3) wenzhu zhenjiao, secure our own position; (4) taoguang yanghui, conceal our capabilities and avoid the limelight; (5) shanyu shouzhuo, keep a low profile; (6) juebu dangtou, never become a leader; and (7) yousuo zuowei, strive for achievements." (From Kishore Mahbubhani, "Smart Power, Chinese Style," The American Interest, March-April 2008, http://www.the-american-interest.com/article-bd.cfm?piece=406.)
China currently just a regional power but will be a global power shortly. Increasing military spending at drastic rates over the past twenty years to improve power projection capability.
International politics--China relishes standing up for little guy against the US--"G-77 and China." Opposed US/international interventions in Kosovo, Iraq, Libya.
Domestic politics--need of Communist leaders to use nationalism to maintain power (will push into conflict). Communists used nationalism to come to power (fighting Japanese), use nationalism now to maintain power, even as reforms change Communist system beyond recognition (and Communists lose ideological legitimacy). Nationalism has resonance with the population. For example, protests after attack on Chinese embassy in Belgrade 1999 (could not believe that US made a mistake--give us too much credit), feel that it is ironic that the US sees China as a threat when the US looks like the global threat. Susan Shirk Fragile Superpower, no leader strong enough to stop slide toward conflict with Japan.
Domestic politics (Liberal yes) China needs to democratize, otherwise provides a threat (democratic peace thesis).
Domestic/international politics--Taiwan. Will need to reunify in order to confirm greatness. May lead to provocative actions in re: Taiwan ('95/96 missile testing, '99 Lee Teng-hui "two states theory" saber rattling, 2005 anti-secession law).
Domestic politics--post-Tiananmen need for loyal military to defend party rule (some units disloyal during the attack), up spending (18% 2007, much off the books and thus unknown), creating more power projection forces (blue-water navy, aircraft, submarines, space weapons [shoot down satellites], trimming forces but improving technology).
Military--fourth modernization preparing Chinese military for modern war (getting away from people's war/masses to technology, using domestic industry and foreign purchases to upgrade capabilities). Military budget second largest in world after US (Pentagon report 2003).
Domestic politics--ideology. Ideology legitimates conflict between China as chief representative of "socialist" world and the US, as chief rep of the "capitalist world." Capitalist world seen as trying to destroy China's gains under socialism, seeks peaceful evolution. Important not to think of China as having "gone capitalist," still people in power who believe in socialist ideology, use it as a lens for interpreting international events. Legitimacy of conflict/struggle in Mao's thought still relevant?
Domestic economy--Economic growth rates (above 9% 2004) too high. Becoming too powerful too fast. Taking over Western companies (Geely bought Volvo)
Domestic economy--will need resources to feed, clothe, house all those people, will be forced to become aggressive (2008 spike in gas prices, competition with US consumers for vital resources).
Domestic population and consumer aspirations. Threat to the environment--all those people with refrigerators and cars! Aaaaaah!!! China has surpassed the US in greenhouse gas emissions.
No, China is not a threat.
Hillary Clinton (October 2010): “There are some in both countries who believe that China’s interests and ours are fundamentally at odds,” she said in closely watched address. “But that is not our view. In the 21st century, it is not in anyone’s interest for the United States and China to see each other as adversaries” (emphasis added).
Liberal no--China can learn to cooperate with international rules and norms, joining hundreds of international organizations. All prosper from peaceful international environment. Discussion between China and the US can keep things from getting overheated. November 2007 hotline agreed (first call confrontational--over Taiwan).
Liberal no--Interdependence between China and Taiwan will lead to a peaceful resolution of the Taiwan issue. Once economies intertwined, no need for use of force.
China experiencing a period of unprecedented peace and prosperity (think of Chinese history). International rules serve the Chinese as well as the US. Why would China want to upset the apple cart? According to Prime Minister Wen Jiabao, things going well for China. China needs three things: "peace, friends, and time." Doesn't want to go out and threaten anyone else.
Position of Japan as challenger--China is not even the greatest power in Asia.
Media looks to portray things as "threat"--sells. Couldn't the US and China grow and prosper together?
Domestic economy--economies rarely grow in straight lines. Growth, such as China has maintained, masks significant economic problems (unemployment, bankrupt factories, unprofitable state enterprises, significant poverty, dislocations of domestic industries due to joining World Trade Organization, overlap between party and business in even corporatized firms, corruption). Could spend the next fifty years just getting people out of poverty, the next twenty years dealing with 300-400 million surplus laborers in the countryside. Chinese technology rising but US still so far ahead and no sign of falling behind. US "creative culture." Chinese growth entering new stage as recognized by leaders in 2004. Can no longer keep up highly input-intensive development model. 2009 problems apparent in exports, growth slowed.
Domestic politics--China's seeming juggernaut masks tremendous problems (environment, corruption, weakness of law, separatist movements in several regions, crony capitalism). Could spend the next 100 years just reforming domestic system, without venturing out to make mischief in the wider world.
Military--Unwise for Chinese military to get engaged in conflict with the US. Could lead to disagreements within the services about whether to seek conflict. Know above all others China's weakness in re: US power. US precision munitions Gulf War I and II were the dreams of China's military men (becoming reality). Nuclear arsenal of the US hundreds of times larger (but Chinese do believe their arsenal provides a minimal deterrence). (But what time horizon?). Technology level still decades behind. Council on Foreign Relations report--likely to stay 20 years behind for the next twenty years (is that too short of a time frame to think about these issues?).
Military--budget rising but still paltry compared to US (less than one tenth). 2006 US US$528 billion. China US$49.5 billion (SIPRI). Perhaps massive rises have stopped? 13-18% annual increases in recent years down to just 7.5% in 2010 announcement.
Chinese people will take care of the Communist regime in due time. As China democratizes, it will cease to present a challenge (Liberal no).
Questions:
By portraying China as a potential threat, do we create a threat? (China denounces so-called "China-threat theory" as a way for US to cultivate ill feelings toward the peaceful developing nation. Sees the US as probably the greatest threat to itself--causes it to act in ways to protect itself. Does seeing someone as a threat cause us to miss other important developments because we view everything through the threat lens? Cutting visas for Chinese, turn educated against us).
Are we destined to be engaged in a clash of civilizations with the Chinese?
If you are a realist and view China as a threat, what do you do?
If you are a liberal, is China a threat? What do you do?
Is China seen as a threat by the current administration?
UNTHINK: Is the United States a threat to China?
Approaches of different US administrations toward China.
James Mann About Face. Argument that US presidents come in talking tough about China but then, in the course of running US foreign policy, discover that China is a necessary country.
Two examples:
Clinton: started administration by criticizing China, playing up the most-favored-nation (MFN) issue (that China's trade should be subject to renewal on an annual basis based on human rights performance) and Bush Sr.'s "coddling of the butchers of Beijing."
Wound up calling China a "strategic partner" to the eternal ire of US Republicans. Strong argument by other Asian countries along these new Clinton lines, need to engage China, teach it how to behave according to international rules, engage it in a web of mutually beneficial prosperity (Liberalism/constructivism).
Bush: came in to office taking an extremely provocative line on China, identifying the country by name as a "strategic competitor" of the United States. Speaking of containing China, overt promise to defend Taiwan (departure from long-time US policy of "strategic ambiguity.") (realist).
Press of other matters: war on terror/Iraq, need Chinese help in re: North Korea nuclear threat, new warm and fuzzy feelings toward the Chinese, invited Jiang Zemin to Texas ranch as sign of closeness of relationship.
India's rise:
Is India a threat? What would a realist say? What would a liberal?
Yes
Size, need for resources (realist)
Historically aggrieved great civilization
Nuclear weapons (realist)
Stealing jobs, work for pennies
Taking over Western companies (Jaguar, Land Rover)
Growing too fast, unphased by crisis
Expanding defense reach, patrolling off Somalia for pirates (realist)
Problems with nuclear-armed Pakistan
Graduate more engineers per year than US has
No
Democracies don't fight other democracies (liberal, democratic peace thesis)
Domestic problems, poverty of hundreds of millions to solve, inefficiencies of business/government, slothful state sector, ethnic/caste/linguistic heterogeneity and conflict, Kashmir, terrorism, problems with Pakistan
Ally v. terror
Military budget still a fraction of the US'
Updated: November 8, 2011.