Over at Foreign Affairs, James F. Hoge, Jr. contributed a piece on the rise of Asia and its influence on international relations. You are HIGHLY encouraged to read it in its entirety — allow me to cite its summary below:
Global power shifts happen rarely and are even less often peaceful. Washington must take heed: Asia is rising fast, with its growing economic power translating into political and military strength. The West must adapt — or be left behind.
And here’s the intro:
The transfer of power from West to East is gathering pace and soon will dramatically change the context for dealing with international challenges — as well as the challenges themselves. Many in the West are already aware of Asia’s growing strength. This awareness, however, has not yet been translated into preparedness. And therein lies a danger: that Western countries will repeat their past mistakes.
Major shifts of power between states, not to mention regions, occur infrequently and are rarely peaceful. In the early twentieth century, the imperial order and the aspiring states of Germany and Japan failed to adjust to each other. The conflict that resulted devastated large parts of the globe. Today, the transformation of the international system will be even bigger and will require the assimilation of markedly different political and cultural traditions. This time, the populous states of Asia are the aspirants seeking to play a greater role. Like Japan and Germany back then, these rising powers are nationalistic, seek redress of past grievances, and want to claim their place in the sun. Asia’s growing economic power is translating into greater political and military power, thus increasing the potential damage of conflicts. Within the region, the flash points for hostilities — Taiwan, the Korean Peninsula, and divided Kashmir — have defied peaceful resolution. Any of them could explode into large-scale warfare that would make the current Middle East confrontations seem like police operations. In short, the stakes in Asia are huge and will challenge the West’s adaptability.
Well, I hope that whet your appetite. Generally speaking, I’m quite suspicious of “beware the rising Chinese dragon” analysis — we heard much of the same talk in the 1980s about Japan, and look how that turned out. Yes, if — IF– China is able to make good on its potential, that would usher in MAJOR changes in the international system. In such a scenario, I can’t see how it would possible for the U.S. to maintain its leadership role in East Asia — why would China concede leadership to a country it thinks it could beat? The problem with this is that there is absolutely no guarantee that China will continue to grow like it has been. In fact, China may very well go in the tank, which could have an equally disastrous impact on the region from a U.S. (indeed, global) point of view. Moreover, even if China continues to grow, that growth may actually further U.S. interests in the region by encouraging the rise of socio-political forces within China that may be more conducive to continued political and economic cooperation with the United States. Yes, Chinese growth might also lead to conflicts over access to markets and resources — exploitation of Central Asian oil and gas fields might become such a place of contention — but those conflicts (which are not necessarily inevitable) may be counterbalanced by improvement in other sectors of the relationship.
There is another issue here, too — as Hoge points out, the West ought to avoid repeating the mistakes of the past. But as the Chosun Ilbo’s Lee Seon-min pointed out way back in January, it’s not just the West that needs to remember the lessons of history — East Asia itself may very well be poised to repeat the same mistakes that twice devastated 20th century Europe. The rise of Asian nations’ economic, political and military clout is not only a potential threat to U.S. hegemony; it’s also represents a threat to Asian nations themselves, especially when combined with increasingly strident nationalism and outstanding historical and territorial grievances. This might be simply a natural development in East Asia’s growth, but it doesn’t take the likes of Paul Kennedy to see how dangerous it could be. If Asian nations play their cards right, Asia might develop into the world’s economic and political center. They could also play their cards wrong, in which case they might go down Europe’s road — expending their energy fighting one another while the U.S. sits in the back and cleans up. The point is, the lessons of history need to be remembered by all.
14 Comments
Can China ramp their military up to a useful point before the Chinese population declines rapidly into old age (roughly 2020)?
Read “The Coming Collapse of China” by Gordon Chang to understand that China isn’t going to be master of the planet, as some gleefully suggest.
Or read this summary of a talk he recently gave at Seoul National University: http://english.ohmynews.com/ar.....p;rel_no=1
Also, China, unlike the Western powers, is going to “get old before it gets rich,” thanks in large part to the establishment Lefty economists who equated population growth with miserable poverty and convinced China to go for the “one-child” policy.
Finally, China much blame for all 3 of those crises the Marmot names - Taiwan, Korean penninsula, and Kashmir (India/Pakistan) - and the last 2 have been exacerbated enormously by the Chinese who have seen fit to proliferate nuclear technology as if they were handing out Halloween candy. I would also like to remind everyone that the USA forced S. Korea and Taiwan to end their nuclear bomb programs in the seventies, TWICE EACH. The US is good at stopping its friends from building the bomb, but not its enemies…
Gordon Chang’s work is pretty much an alarmist scenario designed to fuel sales.. Essentially everything that can go wrong must go wrong in China for it to end that way. As someone else interestingly noted, those same problems that Chang ascribes to China also manifest in India, yet no one is commenting on the impending destruction of India. While there are certainly pitfalls for China’s economic developement, the likelyhood of it imploding are slim.
Quick note first. I’m usually not picky, but Marmot, please change the font. Today it was hard to read.
Next, I generally avoid both those predicting the rise or fall of the East. I think it is mostly bunk. First of all, they did a poor job predicting what would happen with the Soivet Union and the Soviet bloc. Why should I believe they will get it right in Asia?
Second, as others pointed out, China has the problem of a mega-huge society. It will have a hard time not repeating its history
Git us da Chianese!
Via the Marmot I found an exemplorary article that discusses the rise of the East, with some perceptive comments on the station China is currently occupying. One line in particular stuck out. When discussing ways for the US to maintain its influence in…
Asia by blog
Doing the rounds for the Asian blogging round-up: Hong Kong, Taiwan and China Slowly minds are being turned on the idea that China might actually invade Taiwan. Richard notes that, as is often the case, the media sometimes has hidden agendas on this is…
Just so you are a bit more clear USinKorea, Foreign Affairs is not an academic source. What it is, is simply editorial. Some of the articles can be written by academics, but they more reflect the author’s opinions than anything else. I’ve had a number of professors that have lectured that Foreign Affairs is not to be treated as an academic work.
I have also read a lot about China and Asia coming up in the world. I think there is no doubt Asia in general is getting more powerful economically and militarily. If it is enough for an actual power shift remains to be seen and if so will be a long ways off in the future. I remember reading about 5 years ago about the excess of boys in China due to the one child policy. The article hinted that these men with no possibility have no problem fighting for China because they have nothing to lose. I don’t neccessarily believe in this but it is interesting to entertain the idea.
All these predictions by Paul Kennedy, Gordon Chang, and the likes - are just that, predictions. Nobody knows the future, and just like in Vegas, history is not a very good guide for determining future events. If this were the case, then war in Europe should be imminent. So don’t take these kinds of articles too seriously.
I agree with many of you that predictions such as these are often nothing more than conjecture.
I didn’t read the article yet, but it seems to me that Asian countries, particularly East Asian, have a history of being rather insular (with the huge exceptions of the Mongols). So even if the economic center of the world shifted to Asia, I doubt that the political center will shift from Europe and America.
If one looks at American history, the economic center has definitely shifted away from the East Coast but that region still maintains a large degree of poitcal power.
Th biggest story in China isn’t the 60% non-performing loans in the state banks (India doesn’t have this problem), its the continuing accumulation of non-performing loans at a horrendous rate.
Something has to give. Maybe Jing is right and China will dodge the bullet. But if theres a financial collapse in China, remember who told you first =)
Jing — I agree with you, but I should point out while no one is talking about the impending collapse of India, relatively few are hyping India as much as China. For the record, I don’t think China will collapse — actually, it’s more like I sincerely hope it doesn’t — but just as it would take a remarkable string of misfortune for China to go into the tank, it would take just as remarkable a string of fortune for China to keep developing like it is. And the possibility of serious problems cannot be ruled out — we would have been much better served having listened to those who advised caution before 1997, and accordingly, I think some degree of prudence would be advisable when we look at Chinese growth forecasts.
To echo some of the comments above, China’s rise is not at all inevitable. Just like in investing, high growth implies high volatility — i.e., high risk. How will China deal with a depression, for instance? It’s likely to have at least one.
Likely, China will trade off some economic growth for stability, as the US has done post-Great Depression. In this case, the rise will take longer and there will be a lot less pressure on the global power structure.
If China and Japan every get together, then watch out US trade.