Time:2010/5/6 

On 28 April 2010, Le Yucheng, Director of the Policy Planning Department at the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA), made a visit to Peking University’s School of International Studies (SIS) and Centre for International Strategies (CISS) and spoke to students and faculty at SIS and CISS about the “current international situation and Chinese diplomacy”. The lecture was chaired by SIS Associate Dean, Professor Jia Qingguo, and attended by, amongst others, SIS Party Secretary, Li Hanmei, Professor Zhu Feng, Associate Professor Yu Tiejun and Associate Professor Yu Wanli. 

Director Le first offered congratulations to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CISS) for being confirmed as a “key partner of the MFA in policy research”. Only four research institutions have received this honor. Director Le believed that it showed CISS had made excellent progress over the 2005-9 duration on MFA policy research.  

Drawing on his lengthy experience in diplomacy, Director Le then presented on three topics, analyzing “changes in the international situation”, “China’s impact on the world” and “Sino-US relations”. Following his speech, Director Le answered questions from students and faculty on issues ranging from China and East Asia cooperation to the influence of domestic disasters on Chinese diplomacy. He concluded his speech by expressing his hope that students at SIS would use their education to strengthen China’s voice in the world and to help improve the study of international relations in China.  

Below is a summary of Director Le’s lecture:  

Changes in the International Situation  

The world is now in a new era of development. Profound changes in international relations are creating a new international system. Non-western countries, particularly those in Asia, have been playing an increasingly significant role on the international stage since the end of the Cold War. The importance to the global economy of emerging market economies, particularly the BRIC countries, is now widely recognized. Western countries have suffered significantly from the impact of the global economic crisis. The shape of the international system is now adjusting to reflect these underlying shifts in economic power.  

A key development was the emergence of the G-20 in 2009 as the key multilateral body for coordinating responses to the economic crisis. It still lacks the legal and institutional structures of the G-7/G-8 but it more accurately reflects the nature of the global economy. The value of the G-20 to the international community during the financial crisis was reflected when, in September 2009, all member states agreed that the G-20 should become the core mechanism of international economic governance. 

The economic crisis has challenged the status of other international financial institutions. The International Monetary Fund urgently needs to be reformed. The World Bank is moving in this direction, notably increasing China’s voting rights to 4.42%. Changes in the international system are also occurring at the regional level. The process of East Asian integration is accelerating. The interest the United States and Australia now show in the ASEAN +3 and ASEAN +1 summits is indicative of the importance of this nascent regionalism. 

International relations have become more complicated. During the Cold War, relations between states were defined according to what side of the “wall” of bipolarity they stood. The world is now characterized by interdependence and greater complexity. It is no longer easy to define one’s “friend” or “enemy”. Relations between the US and China, for instance, contain many contradictions. But they do not amount to hostility; these are more differences between friends.  

World politics are also now shaped, to a much greater extent than previously, on the role of non-state actors such as multinational corporations and NGOs. The importance of the Google case within the US-China relationship is a good example. Chinese companies, such as PetroChina and Huawei, are also developing substantial global portfolios. The importance now accorded to the linkage between domestic considerations and changes in international environment and non-traditional security issues are also making international relations more complicated than before. 

China’s Global Impact 

Amongst all these major structural changes, the rise of China is one that has been accorded a lot of attention. China’s growth has been founded on strong economic performance, enhanced productivity and the strength of its export sector. China’s global influence has undeniably increased and it now has an indispensable role in questions of international affairs. The world has been surprised by the speed of China’s development and has been questioning how it should respond to it.  

Neighboring states have benefited from China’s development and regional relations have improved. That reflects, not only China’s purchasing power, but also the penetration of a variety of political, economic and cultural influences. The spread of Chinese language learning institutes are a notable example of this type of soft power.  

China’s foreign policy has been based on the principle of “peaceful rise”. China does not look to maximize its own interests or view international politics as a zero-sum game. However, for the world, whether the rise of China is a peaceful process or not, the most important fact is that it is a “rise”. This has produced some doubt about what strategies to adopt towards China. For example, if developed countries choose to cooperate with China, they may risk losing the technological edge they currently possess. But, if they choose not to cooperate with China, they risk an even greater loss in economic interests.  

Sino-US Relations

Sino-US relations are characterized by a mixture of common interests and contradictions. This is reflected in the history of US-China relations, which has consisted of a number of both “ups” and “downs”. Bilateral communication is vital to managing the elements of cooperation and contradiction that exist in Sino-US relations. The Sino-US strategic economic dialogue mechanism is an excellent example of communication that will help further cooperation in areas of common interest. One of the most important for China is the field of advanced technology and innovation.  

There remains a tendency within US politics to use China as a scapegoat for domestic policy failings. This is the case in constant US criticisms over the undervaluation of the Chinese yuan. Those critics do no consider that, even when the yuan appreciated by 21 per cent after 2005, it has had no verifiable impact on lowering the unemployment rate in the US. 

It is important that both sides approach the relationship rationally and temporarily shelve differences that undoubtedly exist. China needs a stable external strategic environment so it can focus on the priority of internal development. It is also key that Sino-US relations are approached from a long-term perspective. The meeting of President Hu Jintao and President Barack Obama at the Nuclear Security Summit in Washington symbolized that tensions in Sino-China relationships starts to be reduced. 

Although President Obama campaigned on a message of “change”, his administration appears intent on maintaining US global hegemony. Whether that will be possible following the impact of the economic crisis remains to be seen. US industry is suffering hollowing-out and its financial services sector has been badly affected. The universality of American democratic values is now questioned around the world. Yet, despite these changes, it would be wrong to underestimate the ability of the US to recover from the crisis. It retains strong powers of innovation.  

The US, like other countries, is confronted by a moment of strategic transition. It is a time of change. China should seize this valuable opportunity to further its own development and minimize negative impacts from the external environment. China’s rise cannot be halted by any country except China itself. Domestic stability is therefore the foundation of stable development. 

A “Chinese” Approach to International Relations

Both students and faculty members of SIS need to do more to establish a “Chinese voice” in international affairs and a Chinese discourse in the study of international relations. At present, the study and teaching of international relations in China relies heavily on western theories and concepts, which cannot always be usefully applied to China’s situation. Realism dictates that there exists, “no permanent friends, only permanent interests,” and that all nation-states ought to “maximize their interests”. But China has managed to both make friends and pursue its national interests. Chinese philosophical traditions could also be usefully applied to international relations. The concept of “moderation” (zhongyongzhidao) could, for example, help explain a lot about international interactions that realism cannot.  

It is also important that China has a distinct voice in international relations. The language and discourse of international relations remains dominated by western media networks and thinkers. Analysis of Sino-US relations, for example, is overwhelmingly structured through US-centric theories, such as those of hegemony, the “end of history” and the “China threat”. Chinese scholars should look to contribute more to these debates and to think beyond those frameworks. There is an urgent need for Chinese scholars to establish a Chinese “voice” in the analysis of contemporary politics and in the academic study of international relations.