« China Helps Farmers Purchase Electrical Appliances | Home | Unbelievable: Toy Exports Out Of China Up 20% In 2007!! »
The Road East Runs Through The West: Ikenberry on ‘The Rise of China’ in Foreign Affairs (Jan/Feb 2008)
By Paul Midler | January 1, 2008
If you have never picked up a copy of Foreign Affairs before and are a China watcher, I strongly urge you to get a copy of the current edition (Jan/Feb 2008), which includes an excellent article by G. John Ikenberry. I was lucky enough to have had the chance to take an international relations course offered by the author while in graduate school, and I only wish that we had this article to discuss then.
“The Rise of China and the Future of the West” is a piece that calls into question the assumption that China will necessarily replace the United States as hegemonic power. China’s rise is different from that of the United States, the author suggests, because China would be faced with the challenge of toppling not just the global contender, but an international system.
Geopolitics is not a sporting event like the World Series where a playoff ends in a winner-take-all; it’s about building strategic alliances. And while some worry about what might happen should China’s economy become slightly larger than our own, we are reminded that the US is a part of a larger order that includes other leading countries.
“These leading states, most of them advanced liberal democracies, do not always agree, but they are engaged in a continuous process of give-and-take over economics, politics, and security. Power transitions are typically seen as being played out between two countries, a rising state and a declining hegemon, and the order falls as soon as the power balance shifts. But in the current order, the larger aggregation of democratic capitalist states — and the resulting accumulation of geopolitical power — shifts the balance in the order’s favor.”
The United States created the current order at the end of World War II, starting at Bretton Woods. A large number of multilateral institutions assured greater political and economic integration and higher levels of geopolitical stability. China has benefited through participation in a number of these institutions, including the UN Security Council and WTO, among others, and the author predicts that China will increase its level of participation in the system because “the Western order…is hard to overturn and easy to join.”
The author issues a warning, however. He points out that while the US helped create the current world order and that the balance is in the order’s favor, there are risks. The US is not often a willing participant in the order, and he suggests that this is a mistake:
“Many Bush administration officials have been outright hostile to the multilateral, rule-based system that the United States has shaped and led. Such hostility is foolish and dangerous. China will become powerful: it is already on the rise, and the United States’ most powerful strategic weapon is the ability to decide what sort of international order will be in place to receive it.”
One additional warning, but we already knew that this was taking place:
“The strategy here is not simply to ensure that the Western order is open and rule-based. It is also to make sure that the order does not fragment into an array of bilateral and “minilateral” arrangements, causing the United States to find itself tied to only a few key states in various regions. Under such a scenario, China would have an opportunity to build its own set of bilateral and “minilateral” pacts. As a result, the world would be broken into competing U.S. and Chinese spheres.”
Excellent article anyway, and in case you missed the link above, here it is again.
Topics: China |
January 1st, 2008 at 8:17 pm
How “On The Rise” is China *truly*??
I mean, with all the domestic issues to unravel and tackle along with just making sure the population doesn’t rebel against the tyranny of the CCP, the wealth gap, energy, corruption, etc (ironic as that’s how the supposed “communists” came into power in the first place), how many true inroads can be made by China for long term influence worldwide?
The whole aligning itself with Africa and poorer countries is just nothing more than short term injections into arms of corrupt dictatorships for their temporary and fleeting friendship (and resources), no?
Happy New Year
January 2nd, 2008 at 4:57 am
China is definitely on the rise. How much farther it has to go before it’s a security threat is one issue. The alliance building that China is doing in Africa is worth watching, as are China’s efforts in Latin America and the Middle East, etc., etc.
The Foreign Affairs article is important because it points out a flaw with the Bush administration - its willingness to alienate allies of the United States. It’s ironic given that the US created the very institutions that it is snubbing. Who needs to ask the world’s permission on an invasion of Iraq? We’re the USA!
It’s possible to launch a war without the approval of the global community - three auto-making nations, plus, if he’s not off building houses, Jimmy Carter - but, long story short, over the long-term, such a lack of regard for sentiments abroad will only throw more support in China’s direction.
If we are moving away from a unipolar world, it’s because the US wants it anyway. Right?
January 2nd, 2008 at 7:29 am
Well we agree on the arrogance of “W” and his neocon bedfellows that have dragged the good reputation of the U.S. through the ghettos of Baghdad. I don’t envy the job of whoever is next in line to try to unf**k things. Unfortunately most Americans will never read such an article as this. Or even an article that is pure pro-neocon b.s. propaganda.
As for China, I see a subtle “Maoist” method of propping up and even lighting small fires of “revolution” but this time for different ideological reasons, and they are actively trying to cause fissures.
Will be especially interesting to see how, in the long run, the sheiks that run the Middle East choose to align themselves, given their Western educations, tastes, and desire to be seen with “class” as opposed to just some bumpkins with money.