This geopolitical summit season has consolidated
ongoing trends in international affairs. A still-rising China with global
leadership aspirations, a resurgent Russia bent on restoring its superpower
status, and sclerosis and dysfunction in Western countries is likely to
dominate international politics for at least the next 20 years. In fact, we
might only be at the beginning in this long time span where seismic global
power shifts are taking place.
The challenge for countries around the Asia Pacific
is what to do and how to respond. To promote regional peace and stability,
China’s global leadership requires measured accommodation, enough to satisfy
Beijing’s rightful place in the global order but not so much as to lead the
Chinese leadership into an outright expansionist agenda.
Over the past two weeks, during the APEC summit in Beijing, the ASEAN and East Asia Summit in Naypyidaw, and the G20 leaders’ meeting in Brisbane, the patterns were clear. Everywhere Chinese leaders went, they were pestered with questions about China’s aggressive intentions in the East China Sea with respect to Japan and the South China Sea involving ASEAN member states, particularly the Philippines and Vietnam.
Similarly, Russian President Vladimir Putin was
greeted with criticism and questions about Russia’s interventionist aims in
Ukraine after it annexed Crimea in March. Whereas Putin tended to be prickly
and defiant in response, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Premier Li Keqiang
were deft and sophisticated. In place of rhetoric, China has been
following up its geopolitical posturing with action plans and key deliverables.
For the East Asian region broadly, the Chinese have
proposed a ‘one belt, one road’ regional development outlook, underpinned by
the China-sponsored Maritime Silk Road and the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB). While the idea of
using massive Asian foreign exchange reserves to finance Asian development is
not new, Beijing has stepped up by providing US$50 billion to capitalise the
AIIB, and this will be complemented by other signatories. Already 20 countries
in Asia have signed up and more are likely to do so in the future.
The maritime beltway across East Asia is also
financially backed by Beijing to the tune of US$40 billion. Coming soon after
China’s instrumental role in setting up a BRICS bank — known as the New
Development Bank, with an initial capital of US$50 billion, and involving
Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa — the Silk Road fund and the
AIIB would be a game changer for regional development in East Asia. These
schemes would also likely elevate China into a top role in the neighbourhood.
Understandably, the United States and Japan have
opposed Chinese funding manoeuvres for fear of losing out to Beijing. The roles
of the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and even the Asian
Development Bank may be consequently eclipsed. But here, Chinese global
leadership was further on display in recent top-level meetings.
To indicate goodwill and bilateral cooperation, Mr
Xi signed a crucial climate change agreement with President Barack Obama. To
assuage concerns about the growing rivalry between two regional free trade
schemes, the US-peddled Trans-Pacific Partnership and the China-preferred
Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, Beijing has provided a big boost
to open regionalism and freer trade by proposing a Free Trade Area for the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP),
previously an on-again, off-again regional trade configuration.
In fact, the FTAAP can be seen as Xi’s concession
to the US. Instead of a competition between TPP and RCEP, China may have
enabled both to be enmeshed in the FTAAP. And despite media images to the
contrary, Xi and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe had productive meetings
during this most recent summit season.
In the ASEAN realm, Beijing has not committed to
the full formulation and implementation of the Code of Conduct in the South
China Sea (CoC). But it also has not aggravated the outstanding territorial
disputes between China on the one hand and the Philippines and Vietnam on the
other. Instead, Chinese leaders kept saying that they viewed the South China
Sea as stable and reiterated their intent to remain peacefully engaged in the
area. It was a foot-dragging manoeuvre but it did not rule out the completion
of the CoC in the future. The AIIB and the Silk Road fund are the sweeteners in
exchange for the drawn-out and delayed CoC negotiations.
Along the way, China separately struck bilateral
free trade agreements with Australia and South Korea. Both are treaty allies of
the United States, and Washington did not object to either trade agreement.
The Chinese leaders just about covered all bases.
They had something for everyone and showed no belligerence and bluster, as was
sometimes the case in the past. This is not just a global charm offensive but a
full-blown global leadership quest. As a rising superpower, China wants to act
like a genuine leader, shouldering global burdens and responsibilities.
China’s leadership aspirations coincide with a time
when US pre-eminence appears to be fraying around the edges. After his
Democratic Party’s recent losses in midterm elections, US President Obama risks
being a lame duck. His much touted global ‘pivot’ or ‘rebalance’ towards Asia
now does not carry as much credibility as a few years ago when it was launched.
Obama wanted to be a Pacific president but circumstances beyond his control at
home, in eastern Europe and the Middle East have effectively denied his lofty
goal. He has been generally well liked in Asia but Asians are not oblivious to
emerging realities in their immediate landscape.
Simply put, the penultimate question for East Asia
is: who leads? China might play more by the rules if Beijing is recognised and
regarded as a full-fledged major global leader — certainly not the only one but
perhaps eventually first among the two equals because of its location. This is
not a time for alarming accommodation or dangerous appeasement. But the time
has come for more give and take, for China to continue to show leadership
capacity in return for greater global recognition.
Thitinan
Pongsudhirak is associate professor and director of the Institute of Security
and International Studies, Faculty of Political Science, Chulalongkorn
University. This article was earlier published in the Bangkok Post.
No comments:
Post a Comment