The short article “China’s Missile message” by Elizabeth Economy gave clear analysis and critique on China’s foreign policy, Elizabeth also presented her suggestion to U.S. government. The Chinese translation can be found here.
In the article, Elizabeth firstly copied the image of the policy from China’s PR department:
China’s leaders have traversed the globe, preaching the gospel of the country’s peaceful rise, often to great effect: China will do things differently than the United States and earlier European powers did, not polluting the environment, not colonizing countries to gain access to their natural resources and not infringing on the sovereignty of other countries. For their part, senior U.S. officials, with a growing list of challenging issues on their China agenda, are reluctant to focus for too long on the reality of China’s rise. Doing so would only make cooperation more difficult and provide support to an often obstreperous anti-China lobby in Congress.
However, Elizabeth then pointed out, the truth is not so beautiful:
Yet the truth is that China, with its rapidly growing economy and large population, already exerts an unsettling and often negative impact on the world. China is the largest or second-largest contributor to many of the most vexing global environmental problems, including climate change, the illegal timber trade, ozone depletion and marine pollution in the Pacific. It is squeezing manufacturing industries from South Africa to Thailand to Mexico, placing stress on economies ill-equipped to compete. And its weak public health infrastructure but strict media regulations rank it at the top of potential incubators for the next global health pandemic.
Again, Elizabeth discussed China’s non-interference policy and its perverse effect on those rogue states; what’s more, Elizabeth reminded us the anti-Chinese demonstrations due to such policy.
China’s insistence that it doesn’t mix business with politics in its foreign relations, while sounding benign, has the perverse effect of contributing to violence and repression throughout much of the world. Its political and financial support for regimes in Sudan, North Korea, Zimbabwe and Burma, among others, cannot in any way be construed as contributing to global peace and stability. Moreover, China’s export of unsavory environmental and labor practices in countries where it is aggressively extracting natural resources has contributed to anti-Chinese demonstrations from Peru to Zambia.
Elizabeth also stated, such behavior in the international stage is just a reasonable extension of China’s domestic policy.
The lack of transparency, official accountability and rule of law that defines China on the domestic front plays poorly on the international stage.
Finally, Elizabeth smartly indicated, U.S. government actually set a bad model for China. Unless U.S. stops its current unilateral foreign policy, China will be encouraged to pursue its own “exceptional” status in the world.
If we want China to be a responsible world power on issues such as energy security, climate change, human rights and even space-based weapons, we need to step up and lead. We can and should condemn China for not respecting the international rules governing these issues or negatively affecting other countries’ well-being, but we must be prepared to play by the same rules. While other powers may have granted American exceptionalism in the past, China is not inclined to do so. Indeed, China is more likely to seek its own “exceptional” status.
Will U.S. respect the international rules? The Bush administration simply says “NO”, how about next one? Hilary Clinton?