China's new peace strategy

Japan Times | 11.17.02 | Ling Xing-Gu

[Enemy Of The State]

China's new peace strategy

By LING XING-GUANG
Special to The Japan Times

As expected, U.S. President George W. Bush and Chinese President Jiang Zemin agreed at their Oct. 25 summit to strengthen bilateral cooperation. Cooperative relations between the two powers are becoming firmly established, a far cry from early 2001 when Washington viewed Beijing as a "strategic rival."

For the past year, China has been taking a highly flexible stance toward the United States. It has remained basically neutral regarding Iraq, cooperated with the U.S. regarding North Korea's nuclear-arms development and restrained itself regarding U.S. weapons exports to Taiwan.

Beijing is adopting a realistic approach to promote friendship with the U.S., the sole military superpower, and foster a peaceful international environment that is indispensable for its economic expansion. This development reflects a new security concept China has been pushing since last spring.

The concept originated at a five-nation summit led by China and Russia and also attended by the leaders of the Central Asian nations of Kazakstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan. The "Shanghai Five," inaugurated in April 1994, has promoted confidence building in border areas, antiterror activities and economic cooperation. The organization was upgraded to the Shanghai Cooperation Organization ("Shanghai Six") in June 2001 when it was joined by Uzbekistan. Jiang, in a speech at the inaugural meeting of the organization, used the phrase "new security concept" for the first time. He said the group was a new model of regional cooperation based on "a new security concept" of mutual trust, disarmament, cooperation and security.

The Bush administration, begun in 2001, defined China as a "strategic rival," after the Clinton administration had called for a "constructive and strategic partnership" with China. When the Shanghai Six was established, U.S.-China relations were strained over a collision between a U.S. reconnaissance plane and a Chinese fighter over China's Hainan Island. Jiang's proposal for the new security concept was probably intended as constructive criticism of U.S. policy. The concept represented consensus among China, Russia and the four Central Asian nations.

At about the same time, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell visited China to signal an improvement in U.S.-China relations. After the 9/11 attacks, U.S-China relations improved at an accelerated pace, and China promoted its new security concept. Last February, Bush visited China and agreed with Jiang to promote constructive and cooperative relations between their countries. Since last spring, the new security concept has become the cornerstone of Chinese diplomacy.

In a speech last April 10 to the German Association on Diplomatic Policy, Jiang called for the establishment of a new security concept based on "mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality and cooperation." On April 24, Chinese Vice President Hu Jintao used the same words in a speech while visiting Malaysia. These statements were clearly intended as a campaign for the concept aimed at the international community, including Western industrial nations.

At the Conference on Interaction and Confidence-Building Measures in Asia on June 4 in Almaty, Kazakstan, and at the second summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization on June 7 in St. Petersburg, Jiang expounded on the security concept. A summit declaration said the international community needed to establish a new security concept based on "mutual trust, mutual benefit, equality and cooperation."

On July 31, at a meeting of the ASEAN Regional Forum in Brunei, China published papers on the concept. On Oct. 27, at the summit of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation forum in Mexico, Jiang mentioned the concept in his speech.

The concept is based on these ideas:

* Cold War-era views should be abandoned.

* Confidence building is the foundation of security.

* Economic and trade cooperation should enhance security and vice versa.

* A regional collective security system should be established to fight international terrorism and crimes.

* A fair and reasonable international order should be established.

The concept reflects criticism of U.S. unilateralism. China is aware that to prompt a change in U.S. policy it must take the initiative in implementing the concept and influence U.S. public opinion. Since early this year, China has stressed the importance of harmonious relations and taken a neutral stance regarding North Korea, Iraq and Palestine. Mao Zedong stressed philosophies of struggle, based on class struggle; now China is shifting to philosophies of peace, based on the new security concept.

U.S. military strategy calls for establishing a U.S.-led global security system on the basis of regional security systems built on bilateral military alliances with its allies. China had been wary of this strategy, fearing it could lead to a U.S. monopoly of power. However, it has changed its stance and chosen not to confront or challenge the U.S. as long as the latter does not intervene in its domestic issues, such as the Taiwan problem. It tolerates U.S. leadership in the world.

Furthermore, China stresses the importance of cooperation between China, the top developing country, and the U.S., the most advanced country, in the stability and development of the world. China appears ready to replace Japan as a bridge between the industrial and developing worlds.

There is no guarantee, however, that the Chinese-proposed concept will become the foundation of international diplomacy. Some Chinese officials fear that the U.S. siege of the world will intensify. Three different scenarios are now conceivable:

* The new security concept will spread internationally.

* The concept will clash with the U.S. scheme to dominate the world.

* The concept will be abandoned as "unrealistic" for the world today.

The second scenario is most likely. However, in the long term, it is likely to be followed by the first scenario. Depending on international developments, the third scenario cannot be ruled out.

The concept is likely to be accepted internationally when U.S. hawks stop worshipping power. Power politics led by a superpower must be replaced by moral politics led by new global organizations, but it will be a time-consuming process.

The present world is plagued by serious problems such as the widening gap between the North and South, a worsening environment, international terrorism and international drug trafficking. A shift from power politics to moral politics should be expedited. It is hoped that the new concept will be accepted as an interim philosophy in the process. Toward that end, world leaders should coordinate to restrain nationalistic instincts in their countries. U.S., Japanese and Chinese leaders have a grave responsibility in this endeavor in Asia.

Ling Xing-Guang is a professor at Fukui Prefectural University.

[Enemy Of The State]

As for the United States for a relatively long time it will be absolutely neceesary that we quietly nurse our sende of vengeance....We must coneal our abilities and abide our time.
~Lieutenant General Mi Zhenyu
Vice Aommandant, Academy of Military Sciences, Beijing

[NY Catholic]

Yes China is the real problem...they will sit back and watch the US , Britain and Russia fight Islam and wait for the right time to go on the march.

[the gillman@blacklagoon.com]

I simply don't understand how our leadership can't see this.
The most optimistic viewpoints admit we are finished in ten years at the present rate. I don't think we have half that.

GATT + NAFTA = SHAFTA

[tallhappy]

China is aware that to prompt a change in U.S. policy it must take the initiative in implementing the concept and influence U.S. public opinion.

Read it again:

China is aware that to prompt a change in U.S. policy it must take the initiative in implementing the concept and influence U.S. public opinion.

Yes, that's what it says.

[tallhappy]

Notice how "peace" means to stop the US from "dominating" the world.

Notice how US leadership/dominance is not "moral".

Articles in english that reflect the Chinese communist thought are few and far between. Godd job posting this.

[HighRoadToChina]

I find those in Communist China or those from Communist China are either so brainwashed or just doing their masters' bidding as I suspect this "professor" is trying so hard to do.

"Cold War-era views should be abandoned."
The US has said the Cold War is over and that she is moving forward to the new threat of Islamist Terrorism (and those nations that either support or harbor terrorist). Isn't Communist China one of those that support and supplied terrorists? See below. And what are those "Cold War-era views"? How about defending against naked agression like the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan (maybe the Communists are thinking about Taiwan)?

"Confidence building is the foundation of security."
I love this "confidence building"! How about principles of freedom, human rights, and liberty as starters for the foundation of security? I forgot they still believe in the hammer and sickle.

"Economic and trade cooperation should enhance security and vice versa."
Yes, like the one-sided economic and trade deficit between Communist China and the US: Of the $116 billion "trade relationship" with China in 2000, U.S. exports to China amounted to just 16.3 billion, while imports from China totaled 100.1 billion. Fair economic and trade cooperation in Communist China's lingo.

"A regional collective security system should be established to fight international terrorism and crimes."
What if the nation is all about terrorism and crimes, as in Nazi Germany, as in Communist China?

"A fair and reasonable international order should be established."
With Communist China in charge of Asia and the Pacific? I am sure they would love this idea.

"Since early this year, China has stressed the importance of harmonious relations and taken a neutral stance regarding North Korea, Iraq and Palestine."
I love this. Three wonderful nations of terrorism and outright threats to world freedom and peace. "Neutral stance"!

Try better arguments next time!

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

I could go off and right a long mail about how in China's 5000 years of history they have never fought an offensive war. How they built the only man-made object that can be seen from space to keep their neighbours out. How 1000 years ago they had 100 million people (Europe had 30) gun powder, the blast furnace,and the world's most advanced ships but decided to turn inward rather than outward.

The Chinese wish the rest of the world would go away and have little interest in being conquerors.

That said, do they pose a real threat the west? Yes they do, but not in the traditioal manner of military might.

Asian society is quite well oriented to socialism. The Japanese are socialists with several highly competitive international firms. In their domestic market they protect their industries like good Marxists. All of Asian society has its routes in China.

Moreover, in the two places - Germany and Japan- where socialism has been fairly successful (i.e. high standards of living achieved - aside from current economic circmstances)the nations spend very little on their military. I think Chinese society may also exert a similar pressure on their leaders to provide more butter than guns - as shown throughout much of their history.

Then where is the real danger? It lies in this quote from the article:

"China is aware that to prompt a change in U.S. policy it must take the initiative in implementing the concept and influence U.S. public opinion."

I am not an alarmist that believes they are going to begin (overtly) influencing our elections - that would be too dangerous. But, the history of Chinese reaction to conquerors is a very good lesson of what might happen. They have been invaded and conquered many times. Each time, they absorbed the conqueror within a few generations by the sheer weight of their numbers, strength of their social fabric and richness of tradition.

My concern is that they will continue in this pattern, but this time the "conqueror" is the West. The Chinese are pursuing a path of peaceful relations and economic growth. In the last 20 years their economy has grown 25 fold. This is what you get with a population that values education and socials cohesion

Right now the US is the world's largest and richest market. Most products, including media are made to appeal to this market and the rest of the world adapts to it, because it is of the highest quality.

If Chinese per capita income were 1/4 of Americas, with 1.3 billion they would still be more wealthy than we are i.e. a bigger market. The Chinese market will gain in influence and the tastes of the Chinese will mold everything from Hollywood pictures to cars to soft drinks. Expect to see more Chinese faces on the big screen in the next 50 years. This will happen. The question is how can we mitigate its effects on our own culture?

I am not too concerned about the American way of life unless they start to influence our values. The West puts far more importance on the value of the indivudal, freedom,and liberty than the East. We must use our current influence to teach them the importance of freedom, liberty and democracy now.

We need to make them more like us rather than allow them to do the reverse. The influences will come. But, we should only take the best of what they have to give and no more. This will be war of cultures, not of arms - and the winner will be everyone or no one.

[HighRoadToChina]

"Asian society is quite well oriented to socialism."

Don't confuse the philosophies of Confucius and Taoism with socialism and Communism.

If you are in Germany, I would suggest that a better way understand what's happenging is that Communist China is following the footsteps of Nazi Germany (post WW II) rather than 5,000 years of Chinese history and culture. They are a recent phenomenal, an aberration in history that will ultimately follow your own aberration.

[HighRoadToChina]

"Asian society is quite well oriented to socialism."

Don't confuse the philosophies of Confucius and Taoism with socialism and Communism.

If you are in Germany, I would suggest that a better way understand what's happenging is that Communist China is following the footsteps of Nazi Germany (pre WW II) rather than 5,000 years of Chinese history and culture. They are a recent phenomenal, an aberration in history that will ultimately follow your own aberration.

[Free the USA]

http://www.freerepublic.com/perl/bump-list

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

Communist China is following the footsteps of Nazi Germany (pre WW II) rather than 5,000 years of Chinese history

Which part of pre-WWII Nazi Germany (as opposed to post WWII Nazi Germany?) would you compare to current day China? Rapid industrilization? Nope, that was happening in Germany since 1870.

I will admit my specialty is German History, not Chinese, but I try to keep informed. I would be delighted if you would enlighten us all as to the similarities.

I also did not mention either Confucianism (Chinese) or Daoism (Japanese). I said their societies are well-suited for socialism. Please feel free to refute this with some factual information as well.

[HighRoadToChina]

"I could go off and right a long mail about how in China's 5000 years of history they have never fought an offensive war."

Forgot Tibet.

[Einigkeit_Recht_Freiheit]

Let's hear your version of the agressive Tibet invasion. It seems to me that the Chinese brutally oppress the Tibetans and deny them their culture. But, they didn't invade for the sake of the acquistion of land or wealth (Unless you think the really love mountains). It was primarily a defensive posture. It doesn't justify their actions, but it also does not contradict my point.

[HighRoadToChina]

"Which part of pre-WWII Nazi Germany (as opposed to post WWII Nazi Germany?) would you compare to current day China? Rapid industrilization? Nope, that was happening in Germany since 1870."

Well, like the Nazi's killed 6 millions Jews and the Communist Chinese killed 60 millions Chinese and over 1 million Tibets. Like Hitler's 1936 Olympics and 2008 Communist China's Olympics. Like France supplying military technology and weapons to Nazi Germany up and until 1938 and like what US, Israel and the West is supplying to Communist China. Etc. Etc.

"I will admit my specialty is German History, not Chinese, but I try to keep informed. I would be delighted if you would enlighten us all as to the similarities."

See above.

"I also did not mention either Confucianism (Chinese) or Daoism (Japanese). I said their societies are well-suited for socialism. Please feel free to refute this with some factual information as well."

I think that it would be you who needs to explain why "Asian societies are well-suited for socialism." Or any society for that matter.

[tallhappy]

I could go off and right a long mail about how in China's 5000 years of history they have never fought an offensive war.

Yes you could, but you'd be either hopelessly ignorant and easily fooled or overtly lying.

I don't know what's worse.

[ApesForEvolution]

Translation: More watering down on America's end while China slips into super power status, with our help.

[ApesForEvolution]

And what facts did you present? You both wrote your own editorials...

[HighRoadToChina]

"Let's hear your version of the agressive Tibet invasion. It seems to me that the Chinese brutally oppress the Tibetans and deny them their culture. But, they didn't invade for the sake of the acquistion of land or wealth (Unless you think the really love mountains)."

The Communist Chinese did it to "save the Tibetans"--from themselves. My friend, you do need to read a bit more about history, before doing this to yourself.

The Communist Chinese invaded--YES, invaded--Tibet for the following reasons:

1. Strategic location to station their ICBM's (high terrain and desert--hard to get to and away from people).

2. Tibetan wealth that was subsequently looted.

3. Spiritual reasons--to destroy a culture and people that have been a spiritual light in the world for centuries (remember now the Communists are very anti-religious) and they are doing this through cultural genocide by importing Chinese people in the millions into Tibet to wipe out the Tibetan culture once and for all.

4. Tibet also does have natural resources that the Communists are interested in pilfering.

Also, on another issue about the similarities between Nazi Germany and Communist China: I seem to remember that there were concentration camps in Nazi Germany: well, there just happens to be 8 million Chinese in "Laogai" slave concentration camps in Communist China TODAY.

Also, socialism might be great for post-Nazi Germany today, but don't go and spread this disease to the world. THanks but no thanks.