COUNTER-ARGUMENTS
Economic Stability
China’s rise will not be a threat to Asian stability. It seems that the peaceful rise of China is calculated by other Asian countries as a potential economic threat in the region. But on the contrary, China is not a threat as perceived. China, in reality is just another regular state making waves to restore its lost pride after being materially humiliated, defeated, and shammed by Imperial Japan –and the West- in pre-modern East Asia. Its peaceful rise to global importance is ironically a hybrid balance between capitalism and socialism, which some experts and scholars are still struggling to explain. In my counter argument I will briefly explain China’s peaceful rise and its threat perception in the Asia-Pacific region. China’s main objective is to build and project soft power diplomacy with more focus on developing countries to share its wealth and promote a harmonious and peaceful society. China has no intention of pursing an expansionist approach or becoming hegemony in the Asian region or globally for that matter.
To support the counterargument that China is not an economic threat to Asian stability I will demonstrate how China is experiencing the same economic prosperity and drawbacks as any other Asian state. Case in point, due to surging energy prices, there are increased transportation costs for moving goods from one place to another and the difficulties of a scattered supply chain are encouraging some Chinese firms that had previously outsourced components to Southeast Asia to relocate their associated research-and-development and operational activities within China to other Asian states. Therefore, processing-related imports have declined from over 40 percent of China’s total impor...
... middle of paper ...
... challenge to unrestricted U.S. global-economic-dominance is threatening to the U.S and its allies in Asia. The arguments detailed in this essay of China’s rise posing a threat to Asia’s stability are much stronger than the counterarguments. Case in point, China’s continued rise might begin to foster the idea of neo-Bismarckism and world hegemony. With a continued alliance with Russia and North Korea and a reduced U.S. military, it will be easy to accomplish world-dominance over the long run. If China keeps licking its fingers from their “sweet super-power emergence” it could be a matter of time before a new leader comes along with a new vision and ideology to divide and conquer. World supremacy is addictive in itself. Therefore, the U.S. and its regional allies should contain and restrain China to maintain Asia’s stability before it becomes too powerful to curtail.
Moreover, economic interdependence promotes peaceful trade between countries since it is beneficial and avoids war at all cost. For example, “China’s economy is thoroughly integrated in this complex interdependence global economy,” thus it would be suicidal for China to start war (Wong, The Rise of Great Powers, Nov.18). China free trades with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and has developed a profitable relationship that led to trade surplus (Kaplan, pg.3). As a result, starting conflicts with the ASEAN will threaten the Chinese economy because it will drastically impact free trade and will cause a downfall in profits. The possibility of war between China and United States is remote because China would rather benefit from resources such as, security, technology, and market that United States provides (Wong, The Rise of Great Powers, Nov.18). Although economic power shifts to China, United States provides security because it has always been the dominant hegemony; therefore, it has a better and powerful economy (Green, pg.34). It is evident that China’s economy is rapidly increasing, but it still has no interest in being the head hegemony and therefore does not challenge United States. That being said, countries choose to avoid conflicts with United States or their trading partners since it will negatively impact their markets and investments.
Post-Cold War Asia has been witness to a China that increasingly focuses its foreign policy on its neighbors rather than on a regional or global context. This stems from China's realization that free markets have triumphed over centrally planned economies and that a world revolution is not going to happen. This has two implications. One, China no longer needs to divert resources to involve itself in global politics since the proletarian revolution is not going to take place. Second, China needs to embark on a program of economic development and modernization (F. Wang p. 32 and J. Wang p. 80).
Lanxin Xiang, a professor of international politics at the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies of Geneva, claims there are two main theories in his article “China and the International ‘Liberal’ (Western) Order”: the one that Ikenberry follows which is that China will join the USA at the top, and the theory that China will “pose destructive challenges to the international order” (Xiang L. 2014). However, Xiang believes a third theory is more accurate. His believes that China will follow neither of these theories, but rather one in between. Xiang says that China has no reason to destroy the current world order, and also that it would “most certainly be prepared to alter some of the rules… according to Chinese tradition, culture and national interests” and “It’s totally unrealistic to expect China to stay at the receiving end of west dominated order, without making its own contributions to improve the rules of the game” (Xiang). This completely contradicts Ikenberry’s theory that “China and other emerging powers do not want to contest the basic rules and principles of the liberal international order” (Ikenberry). Xiang states that in a recent meeting between Chinese president Xi Jinping and US president Barack Obama, Jinping proposed an agreement that would
Robert ,Sutter, China's Rise in Asia: Promises and Perils (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2005).
The article, “Here Be Dragons: Is China a Military Threat?” features a debate between the two authors, Aaron L. Friedberg and Robert S. Ross. The subject of the debate is simply; is China a military threat? Aaron Friedberg argues that China is a military “menace” that we should take as a serious threat while Robert Ross contends that China’s military threat is a “myth” that should be disregarded. The article concludes with a rebuttal from both authors, each offering a counter to the others argument.
The author insists to look at China’s rise from the East Asian context by giving historical references and concluding that China was a dominating power responsible for peace in the region then; and is now as well. He asserts again and again that East Asian states do not fear china’s growth and do not work to balance its rise contrary to standard IR theories based on western experiences. This is mainly because of two bold reasons. For the first argument, David references to the hierarchical system prevalent in East Asia from 1300-1900 where the neighboring states looked over to China as a stable centroid. The second reason is that all the nations today are self-occupied in achieving economic growth and in their internal power issues.
He reveals that prior to 1949, China had been perceived of as an enigma and dormant giant. It was Napoleon who had forecasted China’s power by warning that once China woke up, it would threaten or shake the world. This source provides evidence by reporting on several world leaders who had predicted China as potential time bomb as well as those that feared its rise. They include Rudyard Kipling, New Zealands’ former Prime Minister George Waterhouse, and Russia’s President, Vladimir. The presentation of these cases is credible and sufficient in justifying that indeed, China is affecting the way of international politics. This further encourages research on the impact of its rise after 1949. The revelation of China’s rise to be a source of global shift in politics illuminates the thesis of this study in that having provided evidence that China’s rise has threatened former world powers such as the United States and Russia, the need to recognize what has changed arises. Following this, the information in Scott’s book provides the basis of this study in that it asserts that China is one of the most influential nations in the world, and thus, it is indeed causing ripples and inflicting changes in international politics
From the 1970s, there has been a wave of liberalization in China, which was introduced by Deng Xiaoping. This is one of the key reasons to the rise of China to be one of the economic giants in the world. In the last 25 years of the century, the Chinese economy has had massive economic growth, which has been 9.5 percent on a yearly basis. This has been of great significance of the country since it quadrupled the gross domestic product (GDP) of the country thus leading to saving of 400 million of their citizens from the threats of poverty. In the late 1970s, China was ranked twentieth in terms of trade volumes in the whole world as well as being predicted to be the world’s top nation concerning trading activities (Kaplan, 53). This further predicted the country to record the highest GDP growth in the whole world.
During foreign invasions, China had no choice but to give up their power. They had to “accept wide foreign control over the country’s economic affairs.” China was without a plan. The giant country “had fought to resist foreigners, but it lacked a modernized military and suffered millions of casualties.” However, the Western Powers and Japan did not discourage China to fight back. Even without a military, China was able to enforce
The rise in China from a poor, stagnant country to a major economic power within a time span of twenty-eight years is often described by analysts as one of the greatest success stories in these present times. With China receiving an increase in the amount of trade business from many countries around the world, they may soon be a major competitor to surpass the U.S. China became the second largest economy, last year, overtaking Japan which had held that position since 1968 (Gallup). China could become the world’s largest economy in decades.
China's development is praised by the whole world. Its developments are not only in the economic aspect, but as well in its foreign affairs. Compared with other developed countries, China is a relatively young country. It began constructing itself in 1949. After 30 years of growth, company ownership had experienced unprecedented changes. Entirely, non-state-owned companies can now be more involved in sectors that used to be monopolized by state-owned companies.
Since the initial warming of U.S.-China relations in the early 1970’s, policymakers have had difficulty balancing conflicting U.S. policy concerns in the People’s Republic of China. In the strange world of diplomacy between the two, nothing is predictable. From Nixon to Clinton, presidents have had to reconcile security and human rights concerns with the corporate desire for expanded economic relations between the two countries. Nixon established ties with Mao Zedong’s brutal regime in 1972. And today Clinton’s administration is trying to influence China’s course from within a close economic and diplomatic relationship.
Wei-Wei Zhang. (2004). The Implications of the Rise of China. Foresight, Vol. 6 Iss: 4, P. 223 – 226.
What is the Global Political Economy? According to O’Brien & Williams (2010) this is a term used to describe the interrelationship between national and international, politics and economics. It basically shows the interplay of powerful states, regions, and global institutions which fall under the realm of politics with global trade, global finance, investing and capital movements comprising economics. This ideology does not look at politics and economics in isolation but it draws from other fields such as geography, sociology, women studies and history as these disciplines play an important role in explaining how politics and economics interrelate (O'Brien & Wlilliams, 2010). Nevertheless, the question is where China stands within this global political economy. Hobden (2008) stated that “China is awakening from a slumber that has lasted half a millennium” he believed that in the past China was not considered as one of those countries that actively played a role in global affairs, however; over the last two decades this has all changed. Although this essay will be drawing from examples of China, showcasing its emergence as one of the fastest growing economies in this global atmosphere; its main aim is to evaluate the merits and demerits of two important ideologies in the study of the international political economy, that of Economic Nationalism and Liberalism.
In the race to be the best, China is clearly outperforming the United States. China has strong economic fundamentals¬ such as “a high savings rate, huge labor pool, and powerful work ethic” (Rachman, Gideon. "Think Again: American Decline). Their economy has grown an astonishing 9-10% over the past thirty years; almost double of what it used to be decades ago. China is also the “world’s greatest manufacturer and its greatest market” (Rachman). The continuing growth of China's economy is a source of concern for not only the U.S. but surrounding nations as well. One could argue that the U.S. need not worry about China’s growth because of the spread of globalization and that western ideologies would influence China to turn to democracy. Yet China has still managed to “incorporate censorship and one party rule with continuing economic success” (Rachman) and remains a communist country. Hypothetically, even if China does resort to a democratic state, this does not gua...