Can
China Be Contained?
In a close-knit world, pressuring Beijing could have
unintended consequences
by Jeffrey E. Garten
For over a decade now pundits have speculated
as to how the rise of China as a major power
would affect the world. That future is now, and
the Western powers are flailing about, wondering
how to respond. Pressure is building on China
on many fronts to modify its behavior without
clear thought as to how all these pressures will
end up affecting everyone caught in the web of
globalization.
It is tempting to look to history to see how
- short of war - entrenched powers opposed the
rise of newcomers or adversaries. But such analogies
as 19th century balance of power politics or
NATO's containment of the former Soviet Union
don't work. Reason: Never before has the rise
of a nation occurred while it was so intertwined
economically with those countries that might
wish to slow it down. And since China seems set
on expanding its global role - economically,
politically, and militarily - the rising nation's
antagonists would be best served by working together.
They must determine an approach that is less
knee-jerk in its punitive nature and more open
to working more closely with China on difficult
issues.
It is no small matter when an emerging superpower
faces simultaneous challenges in its relationships
with the US, the EU, and Japan. These trends
are not just temporary or normal adjustments
to China's positioning in a new international
order; they are deeper, more prolonged, and potentially
more destabilizing.
China's rise to great power status may be inevitable,
but no one should have ever thought that it could
occur smoothly - not with the force, scale, and
compressed timeframe that characterizes the Middle
Kingdom's bursting onto the world scene. In fact,
it is rather remarkable that the international
environment has been so benign for China these
past fifteen years.
But that is sure to change. The US has reimposed
textile quotas on China, and Europe is likely
to follow suit. Washington, EU finance ministers,
the G-7, the IMF, and the World Bank have all
been pushing Beijing to revalue the renminbi.
Concern has been rising in the US, Japan, and
within the International Energy Agency that
China's voracious appetite for oil will drive
up global prices. Tokyo has deplored Chinese
demonstrations against Japan. The EU is having
second thoughts about loosening its embargo
on weapons sales to China. Even excluding the
explosive issues of Taiwan and North Korea,
a number of big problems are sure to grow.
Escalating trade tensions are in store as China's
global trade surplus grows - as China accounts
for more of the US trade deficit, begins to flood
the world with politically sensitive products
like autos, and shifts toward more high technology
exports (aided in large part by US firms). Europe's
arthritic economies are likely to be particularly
hard hit, setting back the EU's present support
for open trade.
In finance, even if China implements a modest
currency revaluation in the near future, it is
sure to come under relentless pressure to keep
pushing up the value of the renimbi and to further
open its shaky banking system to foreign investment.
Washington will look increasingly askance at
China's current strategy of cozying up to energy
suppliers on the US list of rogue states, such
as Iran, Sudan, and Venezuela. Nor will the US
take kindly to China's bid to replace it as the
major power in Asia. Diplomatic sparks will also
fly as the Bush administration's crusade for
democracy inevitably begins to focus on the Middle
Kingdom.
The Chinese anti-Japan protests are not just
about the past, but the opening shot in what
promises to be a fierce competition for future
dominance in Asia. This rivalry could see rising
nationalism from both countries, as well as
expansion of military capabilities. China's
stated intention to veto Japan's drive to win
a seat on the UN Security Council will be particularly
inflammatory.
Beijing could be forgiven if it thinks that
the major industrial powers are trying to constrain
its rise directly and through multilateral institutions.
But even if that were the intention of Washington,
Brussels, and Tokyo, such policies cannot succeed.
Their economies are too intricately intertwined;
essentially, what goes around comes around in
some fashion.
The US might be frustrated with China's trade
prowess, but the nature of complex global supply
arrangements means that imports of product components
from China - many of which come from US firms
that are operating there - are critical to the
viability of key US industries such as telecom
and computers. Those same imports are helping
to keep US inflation down - which means lower
interest rates on mortgages, car loans, and other
big ticket items, and a more buoyant stock market.
The United States might want to hammer China
on its currency, but it can't forget that China
is its second largest creditor and holds over
US$600 billion in foreign reserves. Were China
to sell the American IOUs it holds, the dollar
would crash, interest rates would shoot up, and
the US would likely experience a recession or
worse.
Japan is in a bind, too, since it now depends
on China's market for much of its export growth.
Without the China market, Japan would have
no hope of sustaining a recovery after years
of stagnation. And were the EU to turn to trade
protection, it would lose any chance of keeping
its competitive edge; its industries would
suffer, its economies would sag, and its unemployment
would become even worse.
The problems of making room for China should
not be underestimated. But the US, EU, Japan,
and China have only one good choice: to begin
intense consultations among themselves, well
beyond what now takes place. They must hammer
out more understandings about how to accommodate
China in the world economy, albeit in some measured
way. They must face frankly the challenge of
keeping under control what will be decades of
political tensions.
There will be a need for new trade and financial
arrangements that balance everyone's interests.
New understandings about the rules for energy
competition will also be required. The US will
have to understand that it can no longer monopolize
power in Asia in the way it has these past 50
years - not just because of Chinese and Japanese
ambitions, but also because of its overstretched
resources - and find a way to cede some of it
without giving up a leadership role. China will
have to recognize that Japan can be - and wants
to be - a highly constructive and stabilizing
force in the world.
This much is certain: Allowing things to proceed
along the current course is more likely to be
a recipe for intense political and economic conflict
than for a continuation of the relative harmony
that has existed these past two decades. So something
has to give. Something has to change. Admittedly,
there is little precedent for governments' following
such enlightened policies, for that takes far-reaching
compromise. But the world has become much smaller,
the web of communications and relationships much
tighter, the importance of enlarging the pie
rather than just carving it up much clearer than
ever before. Unless a new order is negotiated,
the world will risk entering a frightful period
where damaging political and economic turmoil
is no longer a far-fetched prospect.
|