From the Economist, 3/24/2023, The World According to XI, “He (Xi) believes in the inexorable decline of the American-led world order, with its professed concern for rules and human rights. He aims to twist it into a more transactional system of deals between great powers.” Speaking of “peaceful co-existence and win-win co-operation” the discussion then should focus on China’s objectives and if they can be trusted.
A key to China’s approach, “On March 15th Mr Xi unveiled the “Global Civilization Initiative”, which argues that countries should ‘refrain from imposing their own values or models on others and from stoking ideological confrontation.’” What this says is, in contrast to America’s usual tactic to democratize those it aides, is a live-and-let-live approach, or govern as you wish. The objective appears to be to help emerging countries improve their infrastructure and economies. In doing so they become more prosperous, their people more active as consumers, and they buy from China. China’s wares are less expensive than Made-in-America, so China becomes the preferred supplier. Dictators can continue to dictate and not feel threatened or subject to ridicule or sanctions because of human rights concerns, or violations according to Uncle Sam. Imposing restrictions on Saudi Arabia due to the Jamal Khashoggi murder was a morality, human rights concern of ours, but not of the Arabs. China came into the picture and negotiated peace between the Sunni Saudi’s and the Shia Iranians, to the potential detriment of the Abraham Accords Trump advanced between the Arabs and the Israeli’s.
This fits the argument respecting a country’s “own values and models,” avoiding at the same time any “ideological confrontation.” Is that something we ever tried? Will this style to helping other global entities create better trading partners and less conflict? As for Russia, XI clearly has the upper hand in a relationship between the two. Putin is an evil deceitful selfish bully and cannot be trusted, but Russia needs China. Size alone gives China the edge; 1.44 billion, vs. 144 million or 10:1. China can buy Russia’s oil, which it needs, supply weapons, and tell Putin, to a great extent what to do. When it comes to Ukraine, we need to wait and see. XI may well say to Putin, “stop this war,” offer reconstruction aide to Zelenskyy and a settlement in a fashion favorable to Ukraine, and find a new alliance. The outcome may not please Putin, but help him save face, and save Russia.
Does XI want Russia to become part of China, for their resources, to include oil and more importantly, uranium, as it wants Taiwan for its historical significance and the sovereignty of China, as well as computer chips? Not Russia, as China can buy the resources needed, but Taiwan yes, as a promise to the CCP and the restoration of China as a whole; as XI did with Hong Kong.
Universal human rights is not an objective for Xi. It is more about economic development and not freedom. The Economist article makes clear, China “does not believe in democracy, human rights or constraining great powers.”
The Chinese balloon over America that was shot down disturbed XI and he appears to have altered any attempt to soften ties with the USA by hand holding in public with Putin. It is what seems to me a poor excuse, and begs the question about ‘trust.’ We know we cannot trust Putin, and I wonder too whether XI can actually trust or rely on Putin. The diabolical element herein is if China wants Russia to remain engaged with the Ukraine, keeping America involved, weakening our resolve or ability to assist in Taiwan’s defense. Thus enabling China to recover territory it claims is theirs alone.
The globe is made up of many territories, sovereignties, interests, ideologies, selfish leaders, war-mongers and religious factions. There is a lack of objectivity Nation to Nation as it is too common in practice for peace to be wholly achieved for any length of time. The world is as a snow globe with the falling flakes world leaders, ever changing and melting away. Two world leaders, America and China, co-dependent for goods, services, productivity and new ideas, to be at loggerheads seems more personal than practical. If China is taking a live-and-let-live approach, why at the same time does it appear, the perspective of our administration, to want to dominate the world. Does China no longer need America?
Thomas W. Balderston
Author and Blogger
