No Strings Attached in China’s Neighborhood Diplomacy

Published in Huanqiu
(China) on 28 January 2015
by Cheng Dawei (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Nathan Hsu. Edited by Laurence Bouvard.
When President Xi Jinping talked of the Silk Road economic belt and maritime Silk Road strategies, he repeatedly emphasized the need to uphold the diplomatic concepts of "closeness, integrity, benefit and tolerance" with China's neighbors. Those words are a succinct delineation of China's diplomatic values.

Throughout world history, there have existed several different modes of international relations centered around Europe, imperial China, or the United States, entities that also espoused entirely separate value systems. During the 17th century, civil war within the Holy Roman Empire developed into the pan-European Thirty Years' War, finally ending with the Peace of Westphalia. Europe cast off the interstate relations of the Middle Ages and entered an era of modern international relations that holds national sovereignty sacred over all else, as well as a peaceful resolution to disputes. The European states also reached a consensus on values, agreeing that no nation should ever again force its religious beliefs upon another and that balance in diplomacy should reign.

For ancient China, traditional relations with neighboring states took the form of the tributary system, which eventually metamorphosed into a mutually beneficial relationship between suzerain and vassal based upon a moral foundation. From a cultural standpoint, China did not overcome vassal states with military might, but rather through a persuasive Chinese way of life based upon Confucian society. From an economic perspective, mutually beneficial trade exchanges were common. And as to politics, what China cared for most was the prestige of the Chinese empire and evidence to satisfy the theory of Chinese centralism, while political and security needs were secondary considerations. In the overwhelming majority of cases, the tributary system did not constitute a substantive lord-vassal relationship. For example, the Ming and Qing dynasties, which operated upon the system for centuries, were the most insular and conservative periods in Chinese history in terms of foreign relations. What China more often pursued was a policy of political noninterference.

Ethically, the United States considers itself "the city upon the hill," seated on the moral high ground, the chosen people of God. According to the U.S. Wilson doctrine that in turn is based upon this "city upon the hill" understanding of the world, good and evil are placed on different strata, with good above, evil below and the good tolerant of the evil. As God's chosen, the United States must do its part to forward universal values and establish a global system based upon these values. This makes it quite evident that the United States' inflated sense of self-importance in diplomatic ethics must surpass that of any other nation in history. Henry Kissinger once disparaged this "Wilson-ism" as being naive and a contributing factor to the loneliness of the United States. Moreover, the United States has tied this advocacy of universal values closely together with its economic and military might, and has thus taken on a distinctly hegemonic air.

China's diplomatic values of "closeness, integrity, benefit and tolerance" have their roots in the essence of Chinese civilization, and now hold even stronger implications within the context of modern international relations. "Closeness" encapsulates the natural ties arising from geographic proximity and cultural intimacy between China and its neighbors. "Integrity" speaks to China's honest countenance in managing relations with those neighbors. "Benefit" has certain connotations in modern diplomacy, and points to establishing a network for mutual benefit, combining the interests of two sides into a greater whole. "Tolerance" refers to the call for tolerance and respect.

These values differ from the tributary paradigm of ancient times and the U.S. Wilson doctrine in that they seek to establish equality within international relations rather than the lord-vassal relationship of the tributary system or a unipolar hegemony founded upon a sense of moral superiority by divine design. The values are not only imbued within the "one belt, one road" strategy, but are manifested within the emergent Chinese diplomatic strategy through its relations with neighboring states, as well as being a clear statement of the yardstick of values that China will utilize in managing those relations. They also signify China's participation in global governance, embody its unique character and style within international relations and, as the U.S.-led world order reels from crisis and the international system is pieced back together, will help get China's message across to every corner of the globe.

The author is a professor at Renmin University's School of Economics.


习近平主席在谈丝绸之路经济带和海上丝绸之路战略时多次强调要秉持“亲、诚、惠、容”的周边外交理念。这些阐述明确概括了中国外交价值观。

  世界历史上曾出现过以欧洲、中华帝国和美国为核心的不同类型的国际关系,其价值观也截然不同。17世纪,由罗马帝国内战演变成全欧洲的“三十年战争”结束时,签订了威斯特伐利亚条约。欧洲摆脱了中世纪的国家关系,开创了强调国家主权至上、和平解决国际争端的现代国际关系。在价值取向上,欧洲各国达成一致,各国不再相互灌输本国的宗教信仰,实施均衡外交。

  朝贡制度是古代中国与周边国家传统关系的主要形态,进而形成了宗主国和朝贡国之间一种以道德为基础的互惠关系。从文化角度,中国征服朝贡国的是以儒家文明为基础的中国生活方式而非武力;从经贸角度,利益互惠的商贸往来时常发生;从政治角度,中国尤为重视的是中华帝国的威望,满足中国中心主义的假想,其次才是政治防御功能。朝贡制度绝大多数时候并没有形成实质上的从属关系,例如实行朝贡制度数百年的明清两代是中国历史上对外关系最封闭、最保守的时期。中国更多奉行的是政治上不作为的政策。

  美国在国际关系伦理上自居“山巅之城”,处于道德高地,是上帝的选民。基于“山巅之城”认知图景的美国威尔逊主义认为,善与恶是不同层次,善是高级的,恶是低级的,善包容了恶。作为上帝选民的美国必须推行普世价值,以共同价值为基础建立世界体系。由此可见,美国在外交价值层面的自大超过了历史上任何国家。基辛格曾批评威尔逊主义过于天真,造成美国的孤独。事实上,美国推行普世价值与经济上、军事上的实力结合在一起,使美国具备了霸权主义的特征。

  “亲、诚、惠、容”的中国外交价值观秉承中国文明的精髓,拥有更为丰富的现代国际关系内涵。“亲”体现了中国同周边国家山水相连、人文相亲的天然亲近感。“诚”是讲中国处理周边关系诚心诚意的态度。“惠”具有现代外交的内涵,指建立共同利益网络,把双方利益融合提升到更高水平。“容”倡导包容与尊重。

  “亲、诚、惠、容”的中国外交价值观不同于古代的朝贡思想和美国的威尔逊主义,体现了国际关系中的平等,而不是朝贡制度中的宗藩关系,也不是单边霸权和天然的道德优越感。它们不仅内嵌在一带一路战略中,彰显中国以周边外交为统领的外交战略的出现,准确表达了中国处理周边关系的价值准绳,也表达了中国参与全球治理的理念,体现了国际关系中的中国特色、中国方式,在美国为主导的国际秩序发生危机、国际体系处于重构期的背景下传递了中国声音。▲(作者是中国人民大学经济学院教授)
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Saudi Arabia: Iran War: Cup Moving Toward the Lip?

Saudi Arabia: King’s Visit Takes the Edge off Strained UK-US Relationship

Venezuela: Neither State of the Union nor Commonwealth nor Bolivarian Republic: The Republic of Venezuela

     

Austria: Trump Punishes Merz but Also Weakens His Own Country

South Korea: Trump’s Move To Cut Troops in Germany Must Not Affect Korean Peninsula

Topics

Saudi Arabia: Iran War: Cup Moving Toward the Lip?

South Africa: UN Security Council’s Veto Powers Bite back the US

Austria: Trump Punishes Merz but Also Weakens His Own Country

Austria: Trump Can’t Destroy NATO

South Korea: Trump’s Move To Cut Troops in Germany Must Not Affect Korean Peninsula

Germany: Europe Last

Japan: Attack on Iran: Ending the Battle Is the Main Priority

Related Articles

Saudi Arabia: Iran War: Cup Moving Toward the Lip?

Austria: Trump Can’t Destroy NATO

Japan: Attack on Iran: Ending the Battle Is the Main Priority

Spain: Dangerous Time-Out in Iran

Canada: As Trump’s America Steps Back, Xi’s China Moves In

1 COMMENT

  1. China has no message to the world. It is a one-party state that seeks to control the thoughts and actions of its own people. There is no freedom of speech or of religion or of peaceable assembly, nor the right to vote nor rule of law. China must change or it will be just another great power that ended up on the trash heap of history.