COMMENTARY

Summer 2007

by John Quigley

RELATED ARTICLES:

---

At the start of his article, Jean-Pierre Lehmann deliberately conflates two quite separate issues that have had a bearing on China’s economy and external trading situation. It is clear that 19th century external political and trade factors played a major role in determining the direction of China’s economy for a large part of the 20th century, yet it was internal political developments that hindered its economic and social progress. The responsibility for China’s policy choices rested entirely with the Communist Party.

Once China had made the decision to change, the response of the international community, and the EU in particular, was clear. As Lehmann rightly states, China’s development since then has been remarkable. Now we in Europe and others have a right to be concerned whether its rise will be peaceful. With economic power comes growing political power, if it is matched to military capability. Lehmann warns us that China’s history counts against it rising peacefully with, I would suggest, the implication being that it is up to the authorities in Beijing to convince the EU by its actions that its ambitions and intentions are indeed peaceful. Words alone are not enough, and even now some of China’s actions have been cause for concern.

Whatever individual EU member states’ past relations with China may have been, the European Union itself is doing much to assist China’s entry into the post-cold war multilateral world, and is offering unprecedented opportunities and incentives to the one-party state to engage on a regional and international level. What Europe must ensure is that its huge investment of expertise and resources will be reciprocated by China, and that China will accept that its role in the world order must be that of a responsible actor ensuring peace and prosperity for the countries around her borders, and globally for those less fortunate than herself.

A significant element in China’s rise has been its 2001 entry into the World Trade Organisation. Beijing has studiously met some of its WTO commitments, but others like intellectual property rights protection, the role of the state in the economy, corruption and issues of governance and even the rule of law, have been tackled less well. The resulting blend of economic, social and political reform may have made China itself somewhat uneasy, but I don’t see an alternative if China is to continue to count upon international goodwill towards its rise.

The EU obviously does not have the military might to induce China to change or adapt, nor might such a capability be desirable. The European model of engagement has been to pursue diplomacy and offer incentives for change. If, as Jean-Pierre Lehmann apparently expects, China continues to rise, economically and politically, this model will have less impact than hitherto. China’s military rise also seems at odds with European perceptions of what should constitute good relations between friendly nations. The EU is striving to help manage the change process underway in China, but Europe’s policymakers must also begin to look at how we plan to engage with what over the next decade will be an increasingly dominant power.

This would be of particular relevance, if China were for whatever reason, to decide to forgo the idea of an entirely peaceful rise, and were to try to challenge American hegemony. The need for such an EU-China partnership might never be as crucial as the transatlantic link, but it would surely be important. In light of the EU’s long-term assistance to China, it behoves Beijing to answer European concerns and spell out clearly how it intends matching Europe’s commitment, by participating more readily in the world’s multilateral institutions. Europe must seek answers in the economic, trade, political, social, security and development co-operation sectors and should not be swayed, to quote William Bulter Yeats, that progress can always come ‘dripping slow’.