Opinion & Commentary
Australia is in a bind about China
Ever since China's great reformer, Deng Xiaoping, instructed Chinese leaders to "hide brightness, nourish obscurity," the region has been playing a guessing game trying to decipher Beijing's longer-term intentions. The latest attempt in Australia, a "white paper" devoted to the rise of China, is a confused effort. It is one thing to hedge bets -- probably wise since the future is unknown. But it is another thing to include every possibility which means avoiding taking a stab at all. The white paper does at least refocus Australian strategic attention on Asia. But deciphering the mystery of China would have been easier if only our strategists spend more time going to the source.
The white paper seems confused. For example, it elevates China as the major variable in the future security environment but offers little when it comes to understanding Chinese strategic intentions. Yet, Beijing is not as secretive as most Australians tend to assume. Unlike our strategists, Chinese counterparts are actually remarkably clear about how they think the future security environment will look like.
The region is currently dominated by America and has been since the Second World War. Not surprisingly then, Beijing and Chinese policy analysts are obsessed with America. For example, in an examination of 100 recent articles and memos by leading officials, policy experts and academics in the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, I found that around four in every five documents were about America: understanding American political values and its system; and how to limit, circumvent, bind or reduce American power and influence. In looking at these documents, if there are any doubts that Beijing views Washington as a strategic competitor, they should be dispelled.
First, Beijing views international politics in broadly neorealist terms -- the distribution of power in the world will determine tomorrow's conflicts. In particular, China clearly sees building competition between itself and America as the defining big-picture strategic play. Beijing believes that tension can be managed but never resolved between the established power and the emerging one. It is a structural inevitability. As one prominent analyst of the academy puts it, America is currently distracted but the "spearhead will soon be pointed at Beijing."
But the prospect of serious future tension is not all about abstract notions of power distribution. There are specific long-term objectives that China has not abandoned since Mao Zedong proclaimed the People's Republic of China in 1949. China with its 5,000-year-old history views itself as an exceptional power in similarly ways that America also does - both believe that they are destined to become truly great powers in human history. It takes its "modern mission" extremely seriously: to return China the seat of 'benign dominance' in Asia. Subsequently, China continually claims the whole of the South China Sea as its "historic waters."
There is added strategic significance here. Over 80 percent of Chinese imports, especially oil, pass through these American-dominated waters. China is hugely vulnerable to economic strangulation should tensions escalate. Despite diplomatic denials, it is unlikely that Beijing will feel secure until it approaches naval parity with the Americans. It is also unlikely that the United States and its allies would be comfortable with a Chinese aircraft carrier regularly patrolling these waters.
Second, even if realism is now the rage in the post-Bush world, not so in China. Beijing believes that America is a unique superpower since it is seeking to relentlessly not only build and maintain its power, but also spread its democratic values. This is of grave concern to authoritarian China since it believes that America and its allies will have grave difficulty accepting a greater leadership role for Beijing while the Chinese Communist Party remains exclusively in power. Political values have strategic significance.
What has Beijing been doing about it? As the memos and articles revealed, it is all about limiting, circumventing, binding or reducing American influence.
For example, China has been promoting multilateralism or the "democratization of international relations" in the region. This is obviously to China's advantage since any formal process that offers Beijing an equal say reduces the advantage of the American hegemon. China has also proposed new security structures that are designed to undercut the United States by excluding it: ASEAN plus Three, etc.
More generally, China has been pushing concepts such as "harmonious world" which really means strict sovereignty and non-interference in another's domestic affairs. The problem is that as its "capabilities and interests grow, Beijing has a tendency to widen its definition of its "domestic affairs."
Tension is inevitable but war isn't because it is not just about intentions but also capabilities. Despite its ambitions, China is probably the most analytical rising power in history. It is well aware of its core weaknesses in its economy, civil society, dependence on Western markets, as well as on a stable regional environment in which to develop. Asian states have appreciated for some time now that China remains a cautious power, but no less a frustrated one. The challenge is to encourage caution from Beijing through collective carrots and sticks, and manage its frustrations. Rather than lurching from seeing China as friend, then foe, then friend again, it is time for Australia to learn to play a different game.
Dr. John Lee is a visiting fellow at The Centre for Independent Studies in Sydney and the Hudson institute in Washington, D.C.
