Understanding the Foreign policy of China

[This was published in Dhaka Courier and African Herald Express on  7 August 2014]

China on all counts is emerging super power and, therefore, its foreign policy as a whole is also a marked subject and concern at large for the world, present and future. Interestingly enough, in the vein of most other nations, Chinese foreign policy is carried out by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, which is, unlike other states, uniquely subordinate to the Foreign Affairs Leading Small Group of the Communist Party of China. There is also a separate body of Chinese strategic thought and theory of international relations, which is distinct from Western theory. Interlocutors and think tanks are very important here. Much of Chinese foreign policy discussion takes place between interlocutors who form such think-tanks. An interlocutor is someone who off the record explains the views of a government and also can relay messages back to a government. Unlike a spokesperson, an interlocutor often has no formal position within a government or any formal authority to speak on its behalf, and even when they do, everything an interlocutor says is his own personal opinion and not the official view of anyone. Communications between interlocutors are often useful at conveying information and ideas. Often interlocutors will talk with each other before formal negotiations. Interlocutors played an extremely important role in Sino-American relations in 1972.  This is really a variation from other member states of UN.

China, being a country of cosmic territory, has 14 neighboring nations by land and 7 neighbors by sea (8 if counting Taiwan). Only Russia has as many neighboring nations (14 by land, 12 by sea). Snce her birth in 1949, many disputes and confrontations have arisen and resolved and many yet are sitting on the fence. Of late, these issues have strategically and intentionally been capitalized and politicized by United States as part of its China containment policy and East Asian foreign policy of the Barack Obama administration. Further realization owes its genesis to China-India Relations, China-Japan Relations and China-Russia Relations in the milieu of US-India Relations, US-Japan Relations and US-Russia Relations in particular. Due consideration and assessment should as well be accorded to China’s relations with the Muslim countries in the Asian political landscapes.

China asserts that its decisions on foreign policy questions derive from the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence: mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence. The Chinese leadership originally enumerated these principles in 1954 when China, with a communist government, was trying to reach out to the non-communist countries of Asia.

Today, the Five Principles still hand round a useful purpose. They offer an alternative to the American conception of a new kind of world order — one in which international regimes and institutions, often reflecting U.S. interests and values, limit the rights of sovereign states to develop and sell weapons of mass destruction, repress opposition and violate human rights, pursue mercantilist economic policies that interfere with free trade, and damage the environment. China's alternative blueprint for the world stresses the equal, uninfringeable sovereignty of all states large and small, Western and non-Western, rich and poor, democratic and authoritarian, each to run its own system as it sees fit, whether its methods suit Western standards or not. Another Chinese term for such a system is "multipolarity." The Five Principles put in plain words why America should not be able to impose its values on weaker nations. Thus the core idea behind the Five Principles as interpreted by China today is sovereignty – that one state has no right to interfere in the internal affairs of another state.

China’s use of the terms like five principles of peaceful co-existence , New Security Concept, Peaceful Rise/ Peaceful Development,  Period of Strategic Opportunity” and “Harmonious World” all are intelligible manifestations and  indications of her march  towards future in tune with time, space and dimension. China’s perception of ‘String of Pearls’ is now a fact. Let the world see what actually China gives birth to in the end.

The theme of foreign policy in a state rotates around the avowed principle of ‘change and continuity’. When a state is in a realistically and ideologically comfortable standing to keep and uphold balance and harmony in this regard it then starts becoming a model for others. Unlike USA and other European countries, here China is radiantly more promising and inspiring. In 2007, foreign ministry spokesman Qin Gang made a statement about the eight-point diplomatic philosophy of China:

1. China will not seek hegemony. China is still a developing country and has no resources to seek hegemony. Even if China becomes a developed country, it will not seek hegemony.
2. China will not play power politics and will not interfere with other countries' internal affairs. China will not impose its own ideology on other countries.
3. China maintains all countries, big or small, should be treated equally and respect each other. All affairs should be consulted and resolved by all countries on the basis of equal participation. No country should bully others on the basis of strength.
4. China will make judgment on each case in international affairs, each matter on the merit of the matter itself and it will not have double standards. China will not have two policies: one for itself and one for others. China believes that it cannot do unto others what they do not wish others do unto them.
5. China advocates that all countries handle their relations on the basis of the United Nations Charter and norms governing international relations. China advocates stepping up international cooperation and is against unilateral politics. China should not undermine the dignity and the authority of the U.N. China should not impose and set its own wishes above the U.N. Charter, international law and norms.
6. China advocates peaceful negotiation and consultation so as to resolve its international disputes. China does not resort to force, or threat of force, in resolving international disputes. China maintains a reasonable national military buildup to defend its own sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is not made to expand, nor does it seek invasion or aggression.
7. China is firmly opposed to terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. China is a responsible member of the international community, and as for international treaties, China abides by all them in a faithful way. China never plays by a double standard, selecting and discarding treaties it does not need.
8. China respects the diversity of civilization and the whole world. China advocates different cultures make exchanges, learn from each other, and complement one another with their own strengths. China is opposed to clashes and confrontations between civilizations, and China does not link any particular ethnic group or religion with terrorism.

In 2011, Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi outlined plans for an "integrated approach" that would serve China's economic development. In recent years, China's leaders have been regular travelers to all parts of the globe, and it has sought a higher profile in the UN through its permanent seat on the United Nations Security Council and other multilateral organizations.

The United States Department of Defense in a 2011 report confirmed that China continues to use nationalism in order to increase support for the Communist party and to avoid internal criticism. However, this may also make it more difficult for Chinese foreign policy moderates to calm down tensions and avoid inflexibility during international conflicts.

                                                   

There is no way to fail to notice the absence of career diplomats and foreign affairs experts at the highest level of power in Beijing. China is rising as a global power, but the position that foreign policy occupies in the Chinese political system is very near to the ground. However, neither Mr. Yang, who will continue to oversee foreign relations, nor Mr. Wang Yi, the new foreign minister, is among the 25 members of the Politburo — the power center of Chinese politics.

None of the seven members of the even more powerful Politburo Standing Committee — which includes Mr. Xi and the new prime minister, Li Keqiang — is a foreign policy expert, though one of them, Wang Qishan, has worked closely with the last two Treasury secretaries of the United States, Henry M. Paulson Jr. and Timothy F. Geithner, in coordinating the response to the global economic crisis of 2007-8.

The Chinese leadership might be tempted to entertain its domestic base by adopting more nationalistic foreign policies. China has a lot of domestic troubles, from corruption to a slowing economy. However, the new leaders have to make sure that they fully understand the consequences of China’s heading down a path of nationalism. China is highly dependent on the global market, resources, investment and technology. A more nationalistic, hard-line route would inevitably cause more conflict and direct confrontation with China’s neighbors, even to the point of war. Such an outcome would severely set back China’s desire to assume a role it believes should be commensurate with its wealth and size. Critics affirm that under domestic compulsions, Chinese foreign policy shall remain within the fold of ‘reactive foreign policy’ for a long. Nevertheless, it is true , like other states, China foreign policy also believes in proactive, reactive and moderate approaches as and when required.

Remains there a big challenge for China’s diplomats, who are not represented at the highest echelons of power in Beijing, to make clear to the government how shortsighted and unwise a confrontational foreign policy strategy would be. Will China be in a befitting position to face the challenges of Washington’s ‘Rebalancing strategy’ aimed at the targeted bumping up of US’ attention to Asia since US is currently a hyper state, of course, with hyper moves and drives breeding and spreading, necessarily or unnecessarily, confusions, suspicions, misunderstandings, embarrassments and tensions in the allied and non-allied camps?