Skip to main content

Does China's Economic Power translate into Great Power Status?


Below is the full version of the article I published in September 2010 on Opinion  Asia. Since the website is not functional any more, sharing it with the readers of this blog. I welcome your comments on this idea!


In the recent times, the news of People’s Republic of China becoming the World’s second largest economy in terms of GDP has caught the imagination of observers of China. If the predictions are to be true, then China will become the world’s largest economy sometime in the next couple of decades. Whether about something good or bad, numbers and statistic about the People’s Republic have always been awe-inspiring. However, the question that could and should be asked at this important juncture is about the meaning of these numbers. Since there are many caveats to the present China rise theory, the ability of the economic status to transform China into a great power has been questioned.
Therefore, one must ask as to what China would bring to the world order as the Great Power? There are two dimensions of the great power status, ability and willingness to demonstrate that ability. Moreover, sometimes the demonstrative effect has the longer lasting impact that the ability itself. As one observer recently argued with reference to supposed race between India and China, it is not about which of these gets there first but about which one leaves a lasting impact. Similarly, it may not matter as to when China finally achieves the Great Power status but how it gets there and what tools it has to help it survive in that league.
Earlier great power transformations have occurred based on innovation. Most of these innovations have been game changers, not only in terms of changing the equations between the leaders and rest but also in terms of the rules of the game itself. By doing this, the rising powers were able to maintain not just the power they had but they were also able to appropriate the system to suit the nature of their power. The simplest example of this would be the rise of the United States to the Great Power status and the subsequent creation of the Bretton Woods system that sustained the supremacy of the capitalist system and until recently retained the value of the US Dollar as the prime trading currency. During the war, it had developed not only the nuclear weapons but also had the system that could deliver the weapons to the target locations. Earlier colonial powers had not only found and conquered the trading regions but they also mastered the oceanic roots that safeguarded their trade. Therefore, at the simplest level, it can be argued that Great Power status can be achieved only if a country is having twin superior qualities that complement each other and give them distinct advantage over the rest of the states. It must then be asked as to what China has to offer that is unique as well as relatively rare that it has already mastered? As of now, there are no definitive answers to this question since China’s relations with the world are complex.
The willingness to demonstrate the ability has equal impact as the ability. However, Chinese commentators have been cautious about the praise of their country’s new economic status. They want to avoid any delusion of China having already risen. They know that China has a long way to go before it could be called a true Great Power. However, demonstrative impact of Great Power status is not to the external world alone, its domestic utility is also equally significant. Expressions of Chinese nationalism through hostile protests of the 1990s against the US and Japan have had serious impact on China, which is continues through the jingoistic public opinions expressed on the internet that is remotely against anything the People’s Republic. In a deideologised society, nationalism could be the tool that is deployed again. Therefore, it could be argued that the recent spat over the ‘core interest’ was one in which the world offered China a ready opportunity to literally test the waters for the demonstrative aspect of its great power status.
The first example of China’s power capabilities was its role in helping in the recovery after the Asian crash of 1997. That time its economy was still not integrated with the world economy as much as it is today. Therefore, it could play the role of the saviour to the smaller non-dependent economies. Contrast this with the crash of 2008 when China’s deeper engagement with the US made it look like entanglement limiting China’s ability to play big brother. Therefore, China’s ability to flex its space is limited and complexity of its relations makes it less willing to demonstrate that capacity.
Therefore, instances like the tussle over the Yellow Sea would continue till China finds its trump card. On the other hand, the world will continue to criticise China and its belligerence because its ambitions can not be accommodated in the existing order of things. Till then US and China would continue to play the game of one-upmanship. As long as there is no threat escalation, the world will have to learn to live with it.  

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Why Blame China? We are a House Divided One of the articles published in the Chinese Institute for International and Strategic Studies has talked of the ease with which India can be divided into 20-30 parts in the future to prevent the country from rising as a strategic rival for the top spot in Asia and in the world. This article has invoked a lot of heat and debate in India. This was expected given the fact that China is India’s rival and a strategic adversary in most of the situations. It is also somewhat surprising given the norms governing international relations that no one speaks so blatantly of dividing the neighbour, even if one so desired, more so if you take pride in your ‘peaceful rise’ in international relations. Moreover, the policy of beggar thy neighbour is simply dated in the era of economic cooperation and nuclear weapons. Even as the analysts in India get angry about the perception of certain Chinese scholar about India, they must not lose sight of the fact that the

Civil Military Relations and Media

In India, civil military relations have been strained in the recent past due to a couple of instances. First, it was the date of birth controversy about the serving Chief of the Army. It involved a few missing documents and a legal tangle. Even as it was solved with all honours retained, other set of controversies seem to have emerged. These new controversies perhaps have been blown out of proportion, probably because the DoB controversy was still fresh in mind. During this second phase of the controversy, corruption, under-performance and under-preparedness came into picture.  However, the icing on the cake was the whole supposed coup expose by the Indian Express. Figment of imagination, undoubtedly at its worst, was at play in creating a script that would crate yet another dud like Agent Vinod! Has the media been mature on reportage and expose? Its one thing for a letter to be leaked, but its completely different for the media to publish it without even giving it a second thou
संयुक्त प्रगतिशील गठबंधन की विदेशनीती: आत्मविश्वास का अभाव अविनाश गोडबोले 2009 मे हुए चुनाव के बाद फिर एक बार कॉंग्रेसके नेतृतवमे संयुक्त प्रगतिशील गठबंधन ने सरकार बनाया . इन चुनाओमे वामपंथी दल और समाजवादी पार्टी जैसे भूतपूर्व साथियोंको भारी नुकसान हुआ और UPA मे कॉंग्रेस का स्थान मज़बूत हो गया . इसका यह परिणाम अपेक्षित था के नयी सरकार एक सकारात्मक विचारधारा लेकर आगे चलेगी और देशके भविष्य के बारेमे दिशा दर्शक काम करेगी . 1996 से 2009 तक भारतमे बने हरेक सरकार मे मुख्य पार्टी कमज़ोर रही है और प्रादेशिक अथवा वैचारिक गठबंधन डालो की स्थिति मज़बूत और निर्णायक रही है. परिणामी सरकारोँकी नीतीयाभी छोटे दलोँके हितअनुसार बदलती रही है. जब 2009 के चुनाव मे कॉंग्रेस ने सबसे ज़्यादा सीट्स पाई थी. तब यह अंदाज़ जताया गया था की उसकी मज़बूती उसके आत्मविश्वास मे परिवर्तित हो सकती है लेकिन पिछलेएक साल का विश्लेषण करतहुए भारतीय विदेशनीतिमे ऐसा कोई बदल या ऐसी कोई घोषणा दिखाई नही दी है. 26/11 के हमलो के बाद पाकिस्तान पर दबाव डालकर वहांके सरकार क