As both the rhetoric and actions of the U.S.-China confrontation continue to escalate, more and more countries are being forced to take sides, with even Japan posturing for a no-holds-barred war. In this global atmosphere, I believe many people are as troubled as I am by the questions raised in this commentary. The mainstream framework for thinking and discussing the confrontation between the U.S. and China is mainly along two dimensions: one is the great power struggle for hegemony, the so-called “Thucydides trap”, which leads to the pessimistic conclusion that the U.S. and China “must have a war”; the other is the The other is the return of the so-called “Cold War”. Since the U.S.-Soviet Cold War resulted in the peaceful disintegration of the Soviet Union and the entire Eastern European camp, this framework can be used to launch a fairly optimistic outlook.
But more and more people are beginning to realize that these two frameworks are actually quite irrelevant to the realities facing the world today. The most important reason, I think, is the lack of a cultural dimension. Both the “Thucydides Trap” and the “New Cold War” are a “Western-centric” narrative, which is not without merit, but hardly gives an in-depth analysis of the possibilities. The reasoning is not difficult to understand, because the East, and especially the Chinese, do not think the way the West does, and this has become a key factor in understanding the complex possibilities of the future.
The West, led by the United States, now realizes that the biggest mistake they made in the 20th century was the misjudgment of China’s rise. The miscalculation was not in believing that China’s rise was inevitable, but in believing that China would treat itself and the world well once it rose. The result? As the world has seen, China’s rise has not only been bad for the world, but also bad for itself, choosing a desperate path of self-destruction. Why are the Chinese like this? The most unbelievable thing for Westerners is that the more the Chinese elites and people know about the West, the more they believe they “can’t do the Western thing”. In fact, this is not a phenomenon unique to China, the civil unrest in the Islamic world is related to the cognitive crisis brought about by this “awakening of subjectivity”. The difference is that China, with its “mega-scale”, has the opportunity to overturn the Western-dominated world order. Why did the West not anticipate this danger? This is a question that cannot be answered in a few words.
One explanation is that Western elites first could not imagine that China’s rise would be so fast and strong, and then were blinded by China’s “hiding its light” and let China take advantage of it. Then, the Western political and business elites were corrupted by the Chinese “dividend”. Finally, there is no way to understand why China would choose a self-destructive and deadly path when there is a clear path to benefit itself and others. This incomprehension shows that the clash of civilizations cannot be explained by a clash of interests, but rather by a clash of cultural identities.
Although the Chinese, like many non-Western civilizations, feel the humiliation of their cultural identity under the challenge of Western civilization, the fact that the West has not dared to directly colonize China has reinforced the confidence of the Chinese cultural elite, which is “Chinese Exceptionism” (Chinese Exceptionism) –China is the only ancient civilization that could return to its supremacy over the world. It is not difficult to understand this kind of thinking from a human point of view, for even a medium-sized country like Japan had dreams of leading East Asia against Western civilization.
The core of the “China Exceptionalism” is that China will “rise peacefully”, a formulation that has been interpreted positively and with goodwill by the world. But Xi Jinping’s philosophy and practice of governance since he came to power have made the West and the world at large realize that the “peaceful rise” actually has a chilling interpretation for them, that is, China has the opportunity to “yield without war” and let Chinese values gain a foothold with Western values. “universal values” on a par with the West. Why is it that such a “Chinese dream,” which is not easily awakened, can lead to a devastating conflict between the United States and China, but also offers the possibility of “fighting without breaking”?
The rise of China presents an unprecedented challenge to the United States, one that is increasingly anxiety-ridden and difficult to address by knowledgeable members of the American elite, not only because American society and institutions are inexperienced and unprepared for such a new challenge, but also because both the Democratic and Republican parties in power are being played by the Chinese Communist Party without realizing it. The recently published book “Chaos Under Heaven-Trump, Xi and the Battle for the 21st Century “, by Josh Rogin, is a systematic disclosure of the predicament and peril that the United States was in before Trump took office. This is a landmark and important book for the new generation of Chinese Americans, and should be read carefully by all who care about U.S.-China relations.
The important insider’s view revealed in this book tells us that Trump has opened up a pattern of full-scale confrontation and competition between the U.S. and China in a chaotic and almost catastrophic way, and whether you like Trump or not, this pattern is irreversible. I support the author’s view that the most critical factor in creating this pattern is not so much Trump as Xi Jinping. So does this mean that a catastrophic conflict between the U.S. and China is imminent, as Kissinger recently warned? I support the view that the possibility of a “fight but not break” U.S.-China confrontation has increased because of this global plague from China, and even more so because Xi Jinping is trying to use this crisis to seek global hegemony.
The obvious reason is that the plague has given the United States and the international community as a whole a deeper understanding and consensus about the threat that Xi Jinping’s China poses to the world order, which has had and will continue to have a very positive effect on overcoming the temptation of short-term interests within the United States and the international community, increasing the consensus to resist and contain the CCP, and promoting major changes and policy adjustments. The historic launch of the U.S. infrastructure reconstruction, which has been delayed for years, is likely to be achieved by the need to counter China. The need to compete with China not only reduces political resistance, but also clarifies many of the priority goals and technical routes that were previously difficult to define.
Another important reason is that this global plague has also disrupted Xi’s plans or plans as intended. I have never believed that Xi Jinping really wants to go to war, but the various appeasement forces in the United States and the West, as well as the pro-communist forces in Taiwan, have shown me that Xi’s belief that he has a chance to “give up without a fight” is not an unfounded delusion. In the case of the U.S.-China confrontation, the various potential international political and social forces on which Xi Jinping relies to achieve his hegemony have surfaced over the course of this global pandemic, and many of them have completed their reconceptualization of Xi Jinping and the CCP. This change in soft power factors, coupled with the fact that the CCP will not be able to complete its ambitious 2025 deployment in time, puts Xi in a difficult position where the risks of recent desperate measures are too great and the “time and momentum” are not on his side.
But while both the U.S. and China can be expected to pursue a “fight but not break” scenario, that does not mean that China will not be the most significant threat to the world order. It is the values and rules of the game that underpin the internal order of China under Xi Jinping and the Chinese Communist Party that are the source of this threat. When the United States leads the world in containing this evil beast, it increases the pressure to “implode” China’s economic and social crisis. In fact, Deng Xiaoping told U.S. lawmakers that if the United States insisted that China not restrict immigration, China could let 10 million people leave the country and shock the world order. This threat to the U.S. and the free world through Chinese civil unrest is not only a game strategy of the Communist rulers, but also a real challenge. Even if the United States and China can “fight without breaking”, the United States and the world will have to prepare for this dilemma.
Recent Comments