The Illusion of China's Diplomatic Shrewdness
Check out the referenced source here.
A basic review of history quickly reveals that China is a well-established civilization that has thrived over the centuries, with the exception of the Century of Humiliation. With such a longstanding set of practices and remarkable sense of continuity, it is no surprise that so many Westerners view China as a power with a well-established tradition of diplomacy and a clear plan for the future, making it a potentially serious threat to Western interests.
While this idea certainly makes sense in theory, especially noting the seemingly long-term development and diplomatic plans of the Communist Party, it becomes evident upon further examination that China is not masterminding its strategies for consolidating regional and global power. The most common citation of China’s geopolitical shrewdness is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), conceived by Xi Jinping shortly after succeeding Hu Jintao as paramount leader. This snazzy-sounding project is commonly seen in the West as a mechanism designed to slowly wrest other nations’ interests away in favor of Chinese influence. Yet it took Xi’s government nearly two years to define the BRI, and implementation is still lacking today. What was initially seen in the West as a multi-trillion dollar set of infrastructure projects and debt traps has in reality devolved into a rather privatized brand for promoting Chinese investments abroad.
With such lackluster applications and sluggish development, it seems increasingly clear that the Belt and Road initiative is not the Chinese strategy for global domination after all. Even so, the West would have a serious interest to respond to this strategy if it materialized. Noting the ongoing tension in the South China Sea and corresponding American resolve, it would be foolish to assume that Western powers would idly allow China to pull numerous countries into its orbit through extravagant and expensive initiatives.
Even China’s style of direct diplomatic engagement is questionable. China has chosen more aggressive means of diplomacy over the years, much to its detriment. When Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize by Norway in 2010, the Chinese government elected to impose economic sanctions on Oslo. This was far less a cunning play than an impulsive blunder, as a single man with comparatively little attention ultimately cost China more of its reputation and relations than it had bargained for. Similar misjudgments have been repeated in more recent years with Sweden and especially Canada, when Beijing ostracized Ottawa for the 2018 controversy surrounding Huawei CFO Meng Wanzhou rather than taking advantage of the gulf between Trump and Trudeau.
Put simply, the image of China as a shrewd power is a rather fallacious one. Much of the great power in Beijing’s hands is going to waste thanks to surprisingly ineffective strategies, despite widespread wisdom to the contrary. In the age of a Sino-American trade war and ever-evolving geopolitical circumstances, time will only tell how China fares as a result from its dubious means of global engagement.
