China’s rise vs. Asian rise

By Sunny Lee

JEJU ISLAND _ “Let’s call ourselves ‘Asians’ from now on, rather than calling us by our different nationalities,” said Zhao Qizheng, chairman of the foreign affairs committee of the National Committee of the Chinese People's Political Consultative Conference, China’s top political advisory body, at the recently held Jeju Forum here.

That was an Asian solidarity moment. Also present were Kim Hwang-sik, prime minister of South Korea; Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo, the former president of the Philippines; Gong Ro-myung, a former foreign minister of South Korea, as well as Woo Keun-min, the governor of Jeju.

Zhao’s statement was not likely taken as “bold,” despite the presence of many Western participants, because the theme of the forum was to search for a “new Asia.”

A pronounced feature of “new Asia” is the rise of China. And it was clearly felt at the forum.

China dispatched a whopping 130-strong delegation to this scenic South Korean island, according to the organizer. The army of Chinese participants was present in almost all panel discussions, raising the “Chinese perspective” on Asian and global affairs.

For example, Lu Benfu, vice president of the management college at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, said as China has been undergoing industrialization and urbanization, trailing the steps of the Western society’s social transformation, the traditional family-oriented Chinese social fabric has been worn down. He argued that the Chinese society should restore and preserve its way of living. He cited the case of the Shaji Village in Jiangsu Province where members of families and relatives run a furniture factory in a co-op format and the younger generation doesn’t have to leave for big cities as laborers.

Li Weian, dean of Dongbei University of Finance and Economics, proposed the idea of “collective and sustainable development.” He argued that China’s corporate governance reform experience could offer a new model for development that could “benefit other countries in Asia,” emphasizing the importance of the integration of regional economy in the face of globalization.

Xiang Bing, dean of Beijing-based Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business, sounded like a moderator. He said China played the role of “baomu” (housemaid) in the global economy and called for a compromise between the Western model and the Eastern experience.

Albeit different in the specifics of their arguments, all of these speakers were attempting a new exercise that is bound to be seen much more frequently in this corner of the world: To examine and redefine the prevailing “global standard,” which de facto meant the Western standard; and instead to set a “new Asian standard” in Asia.

Zhao, who was a former minister in charge of the Information Office of the State Council, China’s cabinet, called for a national development strategy among Asian countries that “befits one’s own national conditions.” It was an indirect statement to disown the Western model, which used to be the “global norm.”

Indeed, China, the world’s number two economy and the largest power in Asia, is blazing a new trail in the global discourse of reconfiguring ways of being in the 21st century, as seen in this forum. The move is not detached from the fact that the Western economy is waning and the world now increasingly has its eyes on Asia. For example, business opportunities have shrunken in developed economies and investors are increasingly focusing on the dynamic economy of Asia.

As the gravity of the world economy is moving from the West to the East, so are the political and social norms as well. Most of all, Asians themselves are trying to redefine the world order on their own terms, reflecting their newly found confidence. Here, Western entrepreneurs who do business in Asia and attempt to apply the “Asian standard” to maximize their profits are steering the wheel too.

Yet, what is the Asian model? There is no consensus. Analysts point out that Asia must first integrate itself, like the European Union, and come up with its own development model to share.

Here, the challenge is not so simple. For example, South Korea and China achieved rapid economic development but have chosen different political platforms. South Korea took democracy, while China chose socialism. And now they, together with other members of Asia, are trying to come up with a common model that can explain to the world what the “Asian model” for economic development is.

In addition, China, the biggest economic and military power in Asia, has to lessen the concerns of its neighboring countries and convince them that its rise offers more opportunities than threats before it can convince faraway Western countries.

Thomas Christensen, a professor of politics and international affairs at Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School, sees trust-building among East Asian countries as a prime task. “After the end of the Cold War, many (Western) experts saw the Asia-Pacific region as very unstable because many of these countries exported their goods to the United States, but there was little cooperation among them,” he told the Beijing-based 21st Century Business Herald newspaper last week.

Zhao, a well-respected Chinese statesman who has many foreign friends, is well-attuned to this sentiment. “In many international forums I attended, the common theme often was: ‘China at a crossroads.’ They fear that when China rises it may pursue hegemonic power. Or China may tumble and fail in its development. So, China is at a crossroads.”

Zhao said that some of the misgivings on China are due to misinterpretations by the Western media. “The Western media, for example, said we are trying to export a ‘China model.’ That’s wrong,” he said.

Some analysts view that China’s increasing emphasis on the “Asian model” is China’s attempt to ease concerns that the rise of China has occurred, by highlighting China’s identity within Asia and reaching out to its Asian neighbors. They view that before China changes the existing global rules of conduct, it must first earn the respect from its neighbors.

Cho Dong-sung, a well-known expert who researches relationship between political policy and business strategy at Seoul National University, sees that much of the murmuring surrounding China’s rise is overblown and will dissipate naturally once “China’s rise” consummates, with things settling down. Cho noted that while China’s rise is important, reactions from its neighbors will also play a role, and called for South Korea’s good-neighbor strategy toward China.

Site Map E-paper Subscribe Register LogIn
Site Map E-paper Subscribe Register LogIn