Like what you've read?

On Line Opinion is the only Australian site where you get all sides of the story. We don't
charge, but we need your support. Here�s how you can help.

  • Advertise

    We have a monthly audience of 70,000 and advertising packages from $200 a month.

  • Volunteer

    We always need commissioning editors and sub-editors.

  • Contribute

    Got something to say? Submit an essay.


 The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
On Line Opinion logo ON LINE OPINION - Australia's e-journal of social and political debate

Subscribe!
Subscribe





On Line Opinion is a not-for-profit publication and relies on the generosity of its sponsors, editors and contributors. If you would like to help, contact us.
___________

Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

The myth of the rise of China

By Ross Terrill - posted Tuesday, 27 September 2005


The successful rise of a new hegemon entails strong will on the part of a rising power, a capacity to fulfil the functions of a Number One, and, crucially, the opportunity in terms of how other affected powers react to the new pretender.

Washington is extremely unlikely to allow China any opportunity to become the new world hegemon. The US has cards to play. It can point to Japan's new assertiveness and India's weight. It is by no means a given that Beijing will push the envelope in East Asia soon, but should it do so, Washington would also turn to Australia, Indonesia, Vietnam and other partners in drawing lines not to be crossed.

As for a century, American interests will continue to be served by keeping China and Japan in balance, not by seeing China - or Japan - forge ahead of all others. A tacit security system has existed in East Asia for decades, of which ANZUS is a part. For this US-led system to be replaced by China's leadership would be a leap into the unknown, hardly welcome to Washington. Nor to Canberra and several other key Asia-Pacific capitals. The mood in Japan towards China has chilled, and Junichiro Koizumi's re-election will accelerate the change.

Advertisement

A Japan that saw China eclipse the US, its principal ally whose primacy in East Asia explains six decades of Japanese restraint, would surely challenge China. Once again as for six decades from 1894, China and Japan would vie, and possibly fight, over the region.

Australia's policy on China should be a blend of full engagement together with helping to preserve an equilibrium in East Asia that discourages Beijing from expansionism. I see no contradiction between these twin stances. There are two Chinas, after all: the command economy that sags and the private economy that soars; the Communist Party that scratches for a raison d'etre and the hundreds of millions, unleashed as individuals, who seek a better life. Being wary of authoritarian China yet engaging with emerging China is a dualism we can and should live with.

There is no need for Australia to slavishly follow the US policy on China. Our interests can vary. Australia is China's regional neighbour; the US is the global jack-of-all-trades far across the Pacific. But Australia's policy should not be based on an abstract impulse to be "independent", much less on a recent ALP leader's childish desire to ditch the American alliance as "the last manifestation of the White Australia mentality". Australia's China policy should follow its interests, in economics, national security and values. Bush and Howard are actually quite close on China, except that pushing democracy around the world is less Howard's cup of tea than Bush's.

I have called China ambitious. Is China not a rather conservative power? The two have a yin-yang relation. The expansionist claims of Beijing are transparent and unique among today's powers. But the Beijing regime, while a dictatorship, is a rational dictatorship. It can count the numbers. It is often patient in fulfilling its goals.

This major power seems to know it has major problems. If faced with a countervailing equilibrium it will probably act prudently. It surely realises that others - US, Japan, Russia, India - have a variety of reasons for denying China the opportunity to be a 21st century Middle Kingdom. In Beijing and Shanghai and Xian, I find less talk of China being near to eclipsing the US than I find at Harvard and the Australian National University. China may not be the new colossus it seems to either its enemies or its distant worshippers.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. All

First published in The Australian on September 19, 2005.



Discuss in our Forums

See what other readers are saying about this article!

Click here to read & post comments.

17 posts so far.

Share this:
reddit this reddit thisbookmark with del.icio.us Del.icio.usdigg thisseed newsvineSeed NewsvineStumbleUpon StumbleUponsubmit to propellerkwoff it

About the Author

Ross Terrill is associate in research at Harvard University's Fairbank Centre and author of Mao: A Biography, Madame Mao, China in our Time and, most recently, The New Chinese Empire (University of NSW Press, 2003).

Creative Commons LicenseThis work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Article Tools
Comment 17 comments
Print Printable version
Subscribe Subscribe
Email Email a friend
Advertisement

About Us Search Discuss Feedback Legals Privacy