Keeping a Balanced Eye on China's Rise
It’s Friday night in Beijing and I’ve just returned from a stroll through Tiananmen Square. I thought I’d take a few moments to reflect on what things look like from this side of the Pacific.
Principally, I’d like to echo Naazneen’s comments that China could be a force for good in the world, and caution against analyses that dismiss this possibility outright.
I will begin by noting that the vast majority of Chinese graduate students I have spoken with are extremely proud of their country; many of them have come from poor areas, are the first in their family to attend university, and are living the ‘Chinese Dream.’ These kids are not the products of corruption. Looking out my window now I can see otherwise empty classrooms jam-packed with studying students, at 10:30pm on a Friday night.
Young professionals here will tell you that the apartment they live in now is twice the size of the one their family of ten lived in when they were growing up. Meanwhile, life in China is increasingly free to a degree that would astonish most Americans. Of course there are losers in this society, and grave injustices that ought to be corrected, but it is simply wrong, in my opinion, to think of the ruling regime as insatiably predatory, or the population as totally victimized.
The same could be said for international politics. Say what you will, but China is offering a different set of norms in which they are privileging development and cooperation over domestic interference and political reform. We can argue back and forth (as we have) about whether or not this represents a “model of governance,” but there is absolutely no debate as to whether or not the Chinese are bringing a distinct set of cultural values to the table.
The American reaction to this alternative approach has generally been one of extreme suspicion. And though a healthy dose of skepticism is never a bad thing, foreign policymaking in the United States does not benefit from the notion that the ruling regime in China in demonically controlling an either unwilling or naïve population, or that it is only out for itself in the world, leaving a wake of destruction in its path.
Building on Naazneen’s last post, it is worth imagining for a moment how our policies would change if we believed that most of what we heard from Beijing regarding their policies in Africa and elsewhere was more or less genuine, rather than, as Rachel suggests, a smokescreen blasted out by a “an unfair, unaccountable, cronyist system” that is peddling international “projects that allow for grand corruption of the elites, and further solidify the gap between poor and rich.”
Should the United States make a genuine effort to up the ‘soft power’ ante, it ought to do so with a degree of respect and understanding, rather than unwavering disdain and distrust, for its rising neighbor. And this, of course, is an excellent reason to read Josh’s book.
We ought to be paying a great deal of attention to what China is doing well on the international stage. And though none of that will likely occur in the realm of political rights, they may very well be having a positive influence in parts of the world that have languished due to a lack of international concern. Perceiving the Chinese as nothing more than a wrecking ball will not make for good American foreign policy.
Comments (11)
This diary is more than a breath of fresh air, it is an absolute gust of reality and common sense from someone who is there. We do owe China, a much more mature society than our own by thousands of years, "a degree of respect and understanding" rather than racist remarks like "they all look the same".
Xiexie ni, Ely.
June 29, 2007 9:38 AM | Reply | Permalink
Thanks for that Don. You've got me realizing that in all the critical posts I've made about China, which I stand by, that I've maybe forgotten to properly respect the culture, not only for its longevity and accomplishments but also for the practical truth that the modern American lifestyle is pretty much provided by Chinese work and trade.
It is more complicated than good/bad. Everything is, I guess. Unless you're in the White House.
thosethingswesay.blogspot.com
June 29, 2007 9:44 AM | Reply | Permalink
Bui keqi (booey kuchi)--you're welcome, destor, which is a response to your xiexie ni (shay shay nee)--thank you.
A more polite (which they are) Chinese might instead say: Mei you guanxi (mayo guanchy)--it doesn't matter.
(Please cut me some slack on my Chinese, Ely, it's been awhile.)
Try these out the next time you 'go Chinese'. And when they ask how you enjoyed the meal just say "mama fufu"--I guarantee a response.
June 29, 2007 10:51 AM | Reply | Permalink
My girlfriend will no doubt look at me oddly but I'll definitely try out "mama fufu" and let you know what happens.
thosethingswesay.blogspot.com
June 29, 2007 11:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
Okay, one friend to another, it (mama fufu) literally means horse-horse tiger-tiger and semantically it means not good, not bad, just so-so. You'll get a big smile when you use it if you smile when you say it, after previously using the shay-shays of course. And don't worry you'll move up at least two notches with your girl friend, and if you're like me . . .
P.S. Okay, I admit it, I'm a Sinophile. I lived there two years, tried my hand at the language and brush painting, and I just plain like them, which no doubt colors my political perceptions. It's probably irrational because I like Americans and look what I think of the US government. But as Edward Abbey wrote: "I know my own country best. That's why I despise it the most. And know and love my own people, too, the swine. I'm a patriot. A dangerous man."
June 29, 2007 12:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
I don't really have a problem with the argument that some things about China's rise are going to be positive. I certianly think, for instance, that after the Iraq War, it is pretty clear that checks on the power of the United States to start wars all over the world are a very good thing. (For this reason, I am not at all offended that China is preventing us from doing anything meaningful in Darfur. The last thing we need right now is another military conflict.)
That said, the thing I keep coming back to is that China has succeeded in joining the community of respectable nations, and forcing everyone to trade with them, without even obeying the most minimal of human rights standards. Not only is China completely undemocratic and run by a gang of murderers and thieves who are trying to ensure that a truly representative government never takes power, but the government in Beijing is responsible for some of the worst human rights abuses on the planet-- stamping out the great, peaceful Buddhist faith in Tibet; executing innocent people and selling their organs without the family's consent, with the profits going to government officials; imposing massive and omnipresent censorship on the Internet; imprisoning dissidents and adherents of illegal religions to decades-long prison sentences, etc.
The fact is, China wanted badly to be a respectable nation. We-- the West-- didn't demand anything in return when we surely could have, because our corporations were so greedy that they advanced patently bad faith arguments about how "Asian values" did not include democracy and how free markets would inexorably lead to human rights, when it was perfectly clear that China was doing one without the other.
Now, we are basically stuck. Yes, it isn't all bad. But it is pretty bad.
June 29, 2007 12:35 PM | Reply | Permalink
I lived in HK for 3 years - it wasn't a good experience. I had the opportunity to visit Shanghai and loved it. And I'm still friendly with a few of my business associates in Shanghai.
But we need to differentiate between the Chinese Government and the Chinese people, much like during the Cold War between Western Nations and the Soviet Bloc.
On the Foreign Policy side, the Chinese Government is going to be pragmatic, they'll support whoever is the best for them to support. They also have the advantage, not having to listen to their citizens. Simply put, China will do whatever is in their long term economic interest.
The only advantage the US has is the Chinese are obsessives about "face" (respect). If you ever have the ability to work with the Chinese, the lengths they'll go to avoid negative responsibility is comical - if not hair pulling frustrating.
A quietly threatened Western Boycott of the 2008 games, would have China bending over backwards to avoid this humiliation.
June 29, 2007 12:37 PM | Reply | Permalink
Excellent comments. I worked in China for 6 months once and personally found the atmosphere stifling such as lack of private space and lack of freedom to be "oneself". However, I came out of that experience with tremendous respect for their culture. The one thing that struck me strongly was their intense nationalism that is quite independent of the ideology of their government. I believe we have no business interfering in their internal affairs. I also think that their foreign policy of nonintervention in the affairs of other nations is a policy we should try to emulate. I think it is a serious mistake for us to act as if they are an oppressed people who can use outside support.
One of these days the communist government will lose its 'mandate from heaven' and when that time arrives the Chinese people will change governments. It is for them to decide when that time has arrived.
June 29, 2007 4:09 PM | Reply | Permalink
Frankly speaking as someone who lives in Beijing and has for a number of years, I find it hard to believe a "real" China watcher would be "out strolling to reflect" on Tiananmen Square. It just seems kind of silly or Disney-like.
Anyone who has lived here or understands contemporary China would know that it is a politically and philosophically sterile piece of land and the following are why:
1. Tiananmen Square is the most controlled place in China with plain-clothes police everywhere and soldiers watching everything you do from snap-shots with a friend to flying a kite. In fact there are no seats on the square itself to desuade people from staying too long.
2. It is a tourist spot. Beijingers don't go to Tiananmen unless their relatives are in town and they are showing them around. Tiananmen is all about the nameless masses that come into the capital from the countryside to see the famous square they sang about as children. I say this because there is no intellectual activity of any sort going on in that area, merely tourists that are amazed to see their first foreigner while seeing the flag raising ceremony.
What troubles me is the River Town spirit that Ivy League graduates bring to China. At home they take some classes on China, then come to China and study the language, and then graduate to the ivory towers of CNN, Reuters, or a host of other media outlets where they "educate" the rest of the world about what China is doing.
If anything James Mann's most recent work "The China Fantasy" is one of the best reads on Modern China available at the moment.
The one thing I have learned having been in Modern China and countryside China is that the more I think I know the more I really don't.
June 30, 2007 12:40 AM | Reply | Permalink
But they are intervening in the affairs of other nations. Nigeria, Darfur and Chad are three examples.
China doesn't want to be interfered with, that's for sure. But it's certainly interfering abroad.
thosethingswesay.blogspot.com
June 30, 2007 1:10 PM | Reply | Permalink
While it sounds great that China is developing into a "free" country, I still think not only the cultural side needs to be taken into account, however much I truly welcome a "Chinese Dream", but also the economic changes that go along with it. Thomas Palley makes the argument, that the changing pattern within the Asian economies might eventually trigger, or has already, negative effects. So while welcoming prosperity, and a democratic / capitalistic development, one also might want to think about measures to balance it, in order to keep our markets stable.
July 2, 2007 3:23 AM | Reply | Permalink