“International politics is a nasty and dangerous business, and no amount of goodwill can ameliorate the intense security competition that sets in when an aspiring hegemon appears in Eurasia.” John J. Mearsheimer. Mearsheimer wrote ‘China’s Unpeaceful Rise’* and this is true in the present scenario, when Chinese belligerence and aggressiveness is at an all time high. The world at present looms in the deadly Wuhan Coronavirus, which has endangered lives, stuck financial markets to an all-time low and economies of the world are facing issues internally and externally. These issues internally are due to the spread of Coronavirus and externally, due to Chinese aggressiveness which yet again makes China the focal point of all the distress. Therefore, the present article revisits John J. Mearsheimer’s idea of ‘China’s Unpeaceful Rise’ and links it to the present context of how China has been expanding itself forcefully and has been uprooting the peaceful environment in most countries.
John J.Mearsheimer had quoted that “If China continues its impressive economic growth over the next few decades, the US and China are likely to engage in an intense security competition with considerable potential for war.” The trade war between the United States of America and China can be seen as the most appropriate example for this point, as China’s rise as an economic power has grown in leaps and bounds. Many believe that if China’s economic growth continues, then China in all possibility could overtake the U.S. economy. The trade war dispute, despite several government level talks has refused to settle down and only erupted in further souring of ties between America and Beijing. The other issue is the spread of Coronavirus across the world which originated in China’s Wuhan, as it has also led to several deaths. President Trump has hit out at China for not informing the countries of the world about the spread of this deadly virus, further continuing the trade war conflict. Apart from the loss of life, this pandemic has severely impacted the economies and left their financial markets crashing down badly. It is impacting the social as well as economic lives of millions of people. Coronavirus has taken a large number of lives in the U.S. and apart from that, shaken the American economy and their financial market. It has also impacted the elections which for the first time in history may have to be postponed. All in all, it has led to a rather unpleasant scenario in the relations between the U.S and China and the U.S. has openly decided to counter China economically as well. So, if we go back to Mearsheimer’s quote, it can be rightly said that the U.S. has declared an ‘economic war’ on China.
Secondly, China has been growing its economic strength for many years, reaching a stage where most countries set up factories and firms in Chinese industrial areas, eventually making China ‘the factory of the world’. With the outbreak and spread of the Coronavirus and China’s Wuhan emerging as the epicentre of this pandemic, many countries have decided to withdraw its factories from China. The Abe Government has also set up a budget of 220 billion yen to move the production units out of China and 23.5 billion yen was set aside for Japanese firms to move their production line to Southeast Asian countries. Japan has opted for Vietnam as their new manufacturing hub. It is important to remember that China had been making a lot of money being the factory of the world and Chinese cheap products dominated most of the markets in the world. But with most countries pulling out of China’s manufacturing base, it would leave China’s economic growth to a major low which would inevitably impact their economic growth. China has severely retaliated to this economic countering by threatening to put pressure on countries. Australia had suggested that an international investigation should be done on China with regard to COVID-19. Seeing this, China imposed a sanction on Australia by stopping the import of beef and wine and imposed 80 per cent tariff on barley imports which has led to a major impact on the Australian farmers. Satoru Nagao and Gitanjali Sinha Roy in an article titled “Can a QUAD+ Decoupling Fund be possible to tackle China?” suggested that the “United States along with the Quad members and the US allies should aim to form the ‘Post-COVID Economic Prosperity Network’ which should also set up a decoupling fund to help all the others who are willing to diversify out of China and this could be called the ‘Quad+ Decoupling Fund’, which would prevent China’s arm-twisting and bullying.” They further opined that “once all the countries back off from China’s manufacturing hub, China would be forced to abide by the rules and would be forced to behave properly as then it would be at the mercy of the other countries economically. Since China will become economically weak due to the moving out these factories, it would also learn to constraint its behaviour in the western Pacific which in turn would help the US, all the Quad members and US allies to have a free and open Indo-Pacific without any threat from Chinese maritime aggression.”[i]
John J. Mearsheimer quoted “My theory of international politics says that the mightiest states attempt to establish hegemony in their region of the world while making sure that no rival great power dominates another region”. “This theory, which helps explain US foreign policy since the country’s founding, also has implications for future relations between China and the United States.” The above-lines give a rather clear picture of how China has been wanting to create itself as the mightiest state and establish itself as a hegemonic power in the world, especially now, when the world is under the deadly Coronavirus pandemic. It is also believed that China could have created this deadly virus in order to attain its predominance in the world, and this would also help do away with several great power rivals like the United States, which at the moment has the highest number of Coronavirus cases. It is also important to remember that China aims to make the world ‘a Chinese century’ and it is believed that within 100 years, China would be a great power again. At present China has already completed 75 years and could be feeling the pressure to achieve its dream of a Chinese century, which would change the status quo and the dynamics of the world in the future. It is also important to highlight that despite such terrible times of the spread of Coronavirus, China has continued its efforts of expanding and trying to change the status quo by using force and aggression, which is not acceptable.
To further understand China’s idea, it is important to refer to Mearsheimer’s understanding of international politics where he opined “survival is a state’s most important goal, because a state cannot pursue any other goals if it does not survive.” “The basic structure of the international system forces states concerned about their security to compete with each other for power.” “The ultimate goal of every great power is to maximise its share of world power and eventually dominate the system.” China understands that in order to achieve the China century, it must dominate the system, and so, it goes forward with its method of force on other countries. In many places where China has dominated itself and it has used ‘cheque-book diplomacy’, strategies of the ‘string of pearls’ where it has invested in ports and infrastructural projects, build artificial islands in the South China Sea and converting them into full-fledged military bases, rammed and sunk Vietnamese fishermen boats, Hong Kong Security law, threatening Taiwan Strait and the most recent the Galwan Face-off.
According to Mearsheimer, there are several defining characteristics of an international system and one of them is “All great powers have some offensive military capability, which means that they can hurt each other.” China has been building itself as a military and a maritime power, which is why there has been a significant growth in their defence budget each year. China has been asserting itself as a military power, more so because it has hardly had any exercises with other countries and its experience in warfare isn’t much. So, to keep other countries off, they have been building their offensive military capabilities, especially in the South China Sea, and depicting their military might through the artificial islands and setting them up as military hubs. Also, he had said that “no state can know the future intentions of other states with certainty, and the best way to survive in such a system is to be as powerful as possible, relative to potential rivals.” “The mightier a state is, the less likely it is that another state will attack it.” China believes that by becoming a mightier state no country would dare to attack it. Maybe that’s why China uses force to scare the other countries to stay off. It is important to understand why China created conflicts in Doklam and Galwan. The war of 1962 has always given China a psychological advantage where it feels that India wouldn’t have the courage to attack or to fight back any aggression on India. So, China feels that being the mightier state, India wouldn’t dare to hit back at China, hence it dared to change the status quo in Doklam and Galwan respectively.
Another point that John J. Mearsheimer said was “the ultimate aim of any country was to be a hegemon, the only great power in the system and was almost impossible for any state to achieve global hegemony in the modern world, because it is too hard to project and sustain power around the globe.” China has been seeing the face of the United States of America as a hegemon and according to Mearsheimer, “even the US is a regional but not a global hegemon.” It is important to understand that historically too, great empires have collapsed or broken up into smaller states and no state can manage a huge geographical boundary beyond a point. It is important to understand that though China has been a huge geographical boundary, and has been continuously aiming to expand its territories, which is an aim to change the status quo in their favour.
Also, China needs to understand that there are future possibilities of China getting disintegrated into several smaller states, and this could happen, as there is already a rift between Xi Jinping and the other Generals which could lead to an uprising leading to a disintegration of China. Secondly, China’s economy is down and with more and more countries pulling out of China, it would mean economic backwardness. There would be a lack of jobs, less payment of wages and reduced quality of life due to economic conditions and the Coronavirus. All this could ultimately lead to an economic movement across China, where the Chinese people will demand that China concentrate inwards and deal with issues within the country rather than expanding territories, and getting into a cold war like situation with other countries. Thirdly, the human rights violation of the Uighurs in China could also lead to an uprising, as many Muslim countries are unhappy about the treatment of Uighur Muslims. This could also be taken up at an international forum like the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC) and it has also been said that many believe that Pakistan must raise this issue with China, as China is their all-weather friend. Hong Kong’s Security Law has also drawn a huge protest but it must be seen that by doing so, China is trying to regulate Hong Kong and also trying to promote Shanghai, in place of Hong Kong as a major centre of economic power and this would shift the focus to Shanghai.
With respect to hegemony, Mearsheimer also quoted “The best that a state can hope for is to dominate its own back yard.” “States that gain regional hegemony have a further aim: they seek to prevent great powers in other regions from duplicating their feat.” “Regional hegemons do not want peers.” “Instead, they want to keep other regions divided among several great powers, so that these states will compete with each other and be unable to focus on them”.“ In sum, my theory says that the ideal situation for any great power is to be the only regional hegemon in the world.” China’s dominance in its back yard can be seen, as China’s immediate neighbourhood consists of North Korea and they share very good relations with North Korea. China uses North Korea on and off against the United States and Japan. But in reality, if given a chance to North Korea, it would rather trust the U.S. than China. Japan is a non-nuclear country and is also in a Security Alliance with the U.S. Japan has always maintained good relations with China but the Senkaku-Diaoyu Islands Conflict has gained prominence. Recently, a Chinese vessel spent 39 hours near the Senkaku Island, and in the waters of Japan. This has been a cause of worry for Japan as it is an island country and the sea lanes of communication and trade are extremely vital for the survival of Japan. And so, they have also launched the ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific (FOIP)’. For Japan, East China Sea (ECS) is vital, and it is also China’s backyard which also makes China’s interest in it. China solely believes in controlling it. South Korea also has issues with China, but China tries to keep off it as South Korea is an alliance partner of the United States. Therefore, it is clear, that China hardly has any friends in its immediate neighbourhood and is a clear hegemon in its immediate neighbourhood.
Talking of South China Sea (SCS), a lot of Southeast Asian countries have their interests in the SCS, but most countries refuse to directly deal with China. Vietnam, on the contrary, is one of bravest among all the Southeast Asian nations, as it deals against China and it has the biggest standing army amongst all the other ASEAN nations. Vietnam has been the most vocal about Chinese aggressiveness in the South China Sea. Also, with ASEAN adopting the Free and open Indo-Pacific Vision (AOIP) makes one wonder that is the ASEAN giving up on its centrality as China has no Indo-Pacific Vision. Vietnam has been voicing their objection of China’s aggressiveness in the South China Sea. Now, it makes Vietnam one of the most honest and upfront countries to counter China, and by Vietnam taking this position, it clearly shifts the centrality of ASEAN. Most countries feel that China is their country cousin, but Chinese aggressiveness has led them to question their cultural ties as China has been acting as a bully among the Southeast Asian nations. Thus, it leaves China with no peers.
The Indian Ocean is basically India’s and China has its interest in the Indian Ocean in the next 40 years, as it is vital for its resources. China has been expanding aggressively in this region. China has used the string of pearls strategy which would give it direct control through ports, military bases, infrastructural projects and the recent artificial island build near Maldives has only become a major cause of concern for India. India’s Andaman and Nicobar Island could be one of the strategic points to counter China’s string of pearls. Pankaj K Jha alluded to “the ‘Double Fish Hook Strategy’ which would consist of three nodes-the Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Diego Garcia and Djibouti base, and this would create an effective triangle which could be operationalised for sea dominance, denial operations, maritime surveillance aircrafts such as P-3C Orion or P-8 Poseidon, which would help in long range missions.” Jha also opined that “the logistics support agreement with Australia on a quid pro quo basis, both India and Australia can undertake long term and long range missions.” He further said that “In this network, the US would play a critical role and India is well aware of the fact that operationalisation of this fish hook would complement the US fish hook strategy existent in the Pacific region.”[ii] Gitanjali Sinha Roy talked about the “Maritime Chain Hub between Cam Ranh Bay- Andaman and Nicobar islands-Djibouti where the Andaman and Nicobar can be the centre point of connect, monitoring and surveillance for Cam Ranh Bay and Djibouti”. She further opined that “it would be rather sensible for all the other countries like the U.S, France, Japan, India and Viet Nam to cooperate and coordinate and try to develop and work towards this concept of a strategic Maritime Chain Hub to tackle China and this could also be discussed as part of the Quad meetings and also invite more countries to join in.[iii]" Therefore, it is clear that:
One, China has no real friends;
And second, China is a dominant power in Asia, but if it continuous to be an aggressive power all countries will gang up against it and it has happened in the form of Quad and now Quad plus. China has to realise that countries will not accept their aggressiveness and so, Satoru Nagao and Gitanjali Sinha Roy also suggested “a ‘Post-COVID Security Prosperity Network’ which would be a combination of all the Quad plus countries who would come together to tackle China in the security dimension especially in the maritime sector.”[iv]
John J. Mearsheimer concluded by saying “Most of China’s neighbours including India, Japan, Singapore, South Korea, Russia, and Vietnam will join with the United States to contain China’s power”. It is important to understand that almost all countries have aligned with the U.S. through the Quad and Quad plus, but the question remains, would Russia join the U.S. keeping in mind, its past history, the answer to that would be yes. In all possibility Russia would be joining this grouping before Putin dies, he would like to make Russia Glorious again and that would only be possible if it accepts democracy and is amongst the world democracies. Also, Russians have been world leaders in defence achievements and China has been buying all their major defence equipment’s and reproducing their carbon copy which is stealing Russia’s defence glory. We must remember that China had ditched Russia and China has been challenging Russian control in Central Asia. All these reasons would surely make Russia join the American-led coalition against China.
Pic Courtesy-Li Yang at unsplash.com
(The views expressed are personal)
Gitanjali Sinha Roy is a research assistant at the Centre for Land Warfare Studies (CLAWS), India.
*John J. Mearsheimer. 2006. “China’s Unpeaceful Rise” Current History; April 2006; 105, 690; Research Library
pg. 160.URL: https://ir101.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/Mearsheimer-Chinas-Unpeaceful-Rise.pdf(Accessed on 4 August 2020). Also, please note that the point mentioned in John J. Mearhseimer has been taken from this article.
[i] Satoru Nagao and Gitanjali Sinha Roy. 2020. “Can a QUAD+ Decoupling Fund be possible to tackle China?”published in Modern Diplomacy dated July 21, 2020.URL: https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/07/21/can-a-quad-decoupling-fund-be-possible-to-tackle-china/(Accessed on 4 August 2020)
[ii] Pankaj K Jha. 2020. “Has India activated its ‘Fish Hook’ strategy in the Indian Ocean?” published by the Centre for Security and Strategy Studies (CesCube), India dated 7 July 2020. URL: http://www.cescube.com/vp-has-india-activated-its-fish-hook-strategy-in-the-indian-ocean (Accessed on 5 August 2020)
[iii] Gitanjali Sinha Roy. 2020. “Can Cam Ranh Bay-Port Blair-Djibouti form a strategic Maritime chain hub to tackle China?” published in Modern Diplomacy dated July 12, 2020.URL: https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/07/12/can-cam-ranh-bay-port-blair-djibouti-form-a-strategic-maritime-chain-hub-to-tackle-china/ (Accessed on 5 August 2020)
[iv] Satoru Nagao and Gitanjali Sinha Roy. 2020. “Can a QUAD+ Decoupling Fund be possible to tackle China?”published in Modern Diplomacy dated July 21, 2020.URL: https://moderndiplomacy.eu/2020/07/21/can-a-quad-decoupling-fund-be-possible-to-tackle-china/
(Accessed on 4 August 2020).
