The Modern Rising Powers Of China

Realism is one of the most dominant international relations theories in the academic world. But within Realism, Realists are split on a number of issues. A perfect example of which being the rise of China. Over the past 30 years China has increased not only in population and power, but has also achieved one of the strongest economies in the world. The rise of China is seen as problematic by many realists. Since the end of the Cold War and the fall of the Soviet Union, the US has enjoyed a position of hegemony in the unipolar power structure of the world. Many fear that the rise of China could upset the current balance of power. One such individual is a prominent realist scholar, John Mearsheimer. He believes that war with China is inevitable and “calls for the US to do whatever it can to slow China’s rise.” Another political theorist Jonathan Kirshner wrote this paper to counter many of Mearsheimer’s claims, stating that Mearsheimer’s offensive realism “is wrong, and dangerous”. Kirshner suggests that instead of using offensive realism we should look instead to the theories roots in classical realism to analyse the rise of China.

The recent interactions of emerging and established states suggest that the existing standards of the current global economy are shifting. According to Stewart Patrick in his article “Irresponsible Stakeholders? The Difficulty of Integrating Rising Powers,” the United States must accommodate for emerging states within the global economy and refrain from enforcing their values of an open and liberal international economy in order to achieve effective cooperation. Similarly, Andrew Nathan and Andrew Scobell argue in their article “How China Sees America: The Sum of Beijingʻs Fears” that as China gains more influence within the global economy, the United States will have to respond appropriately to maintain its economic values. Both articles ultimately assert that

The rise in China from a poor, stagnant country to a major economic power within a time span of twenty-eight years is often described by analysts as one of the greatest success stories in these present times. With China receiving an increase in the amount of trade business from many countries around the world, they may soon be a major competitor to surpass the U.S. China became the second largest economy, last year, overtaking Japan which had held that position since 1968 (Gallup). China could become the world’s largest economy in decades.

It is no longer appropriate to say, “China is quickly emerging as a global superpower.” The fact is China is just that. Realizing this the United States of America has attempted to once again turn its focus eastward. Continuing problems at home and in the Middle East however have made doing so difficult. Additionally more and more frequently attempts at influencing the ongoing narrative in the Asia- Pacific region have been rebuffed. Even allies have found strength in the emergence of a system that fails to conform to previously prescribed methods and ideals. This leads to a fundamental question America must answer quickly. Has the growing hypocrisy of idealistic political rhetoric versus actual foreign policy finally undermined American credibility with developing nations, or for the purposes of this paper more specifically China? The answer is yes.

The article titled Why China Won’t Overtake the United States authored by Stephen G. Brooks and William C. Wohlforth brings up many valid points and statistical data to support the thesis of the piece however, it is mainly presented from a liberal idealist point of view. While I agree with, ‘as the saying goes’, great power comes great responsibility, I do not agree with the articles premise or false assumption that a provisional “technological gap” or lack of Nobel Prizes and scientific citations matter much in the way of predicting the future geopolitical actions or capability of any country. Especially one as customarily isolated and historically unpredictable as China.

Thomas Sanderson, Transnational Threats in the Arc of Instability. Expert in Geopolitics and International Security.

In his article, “The Future of the Liberal World Order”, John Inkenberry discusses what he sees as a global shift in power, from the Western and Northern powers such as the United States and Great Britain to the more Eastern and Southern developing states like China, India and Brazil. This potential shift in power has sparked a fear in many people. This fear, as the global power switches from West to East and North to South, stems from the thinking that these new nations that are coming to power will abolish the liberal world order that we all know. I however believe that instead of challenging the United States for power and changing the world order to more reflect their ideologies, these emerging nations will instead seek a greater position of leadership in the already existing world order. Firstly, I will provide an argument of Inkenberry’s main arguments and why realists’ have started to worry. Second, I will show how China is rising to threaten the United States superpower position in today’s world order, and finally I will illustrate ways which show that China is not challenging the Liberal World Order and why.

China signaled that it sees itself as the world’s other superpower, positioning itself as the alternative or even a rival to the United States. China’s supreme leader, Xi Jinping declared that the country is entering a “new era” and is now a role model for political and economic development. Xi has maintained a grip of power far more secure than any of his predecessors, and the party has enshrined his thoughts in the Constitution, similar to Mao Zedong. While Western policy assumes that China’s more modernized economy will make the country more cooperative above, they also worry that China will stay authoritarian and provide support for other anti-democratic countries. While China’s economy continues to strengthen and political confidence keeps

In the future, the influence of China is expected to further increase, with caution needing to be exercised at the level of the reaction of the Chinese population towards the intensifying relationships between their country and its neighbors (Xiaoming, 2006).

It is undeniable that the mutual animosity between the United States of America (USA) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) played a significant role in characterising international relations during the latter half of the 20th Century. On the other hand, it appears that the economic and political interactions between the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the USA will characterise international relations in the 21st Century. As a result, this essay asserts that the claim of a Sino-American ‘Cold War’ is true to a limited extent; as there has been hostility between the PRC and the USA in the past. However, to a much larger extent, Sino-American relations in the early 21st Century are significantly better than Russo-American relations in the mid-20th Century, thus countering the claim of a Sino-American Cold War significantly. To develop this claim, this essay will analyse a number of factors. First, this essay explores the ideological, political and economic facets of Russo-American relations in the Cold War’s earlier stages (1945 - 70). This will be done as to establish the nature of relations between the superpowers. Conversely, this essay will then analyse the ideological, political and economic facets of Sino-American relations during the early 21st Century (2000 - 16) as to establish a framework for comparison. Ultimately, this essay aims to affirm the claim that Sino-American relations are significantly better than Russo-American relations whilst

The People’s Republic of China (PRC) has become more integrated and willing to cooperate within the global political and economic systems than ever in its history. However, there is growing apprehension in the Asia-Pacific region and the U.S. in regards to the consequences of rising in economic and military power in China. Descriptions about Chinese diplomacy in the policy and scholarly are less positive lately concerning China’s obedience to regional and international rules. There was little debate in the U.S. and elsewhere in regards to whether China was or was not part “the international community.” Scholars and experts in the early 1990s have contended

China 's growth as a foreign power is shifting the dynamics of global relations. It can be theorized that China as a growing influence poses a danger to middle powers economically, diplomatically and militarily. The reasoning behind this research branches from the growing prominence of middle powers as players in global politics. Particularly, focusing on the motivations of middle power states and their reactions, changes in foreign or domestic policy, to China growing as an economically, politically, and militarily strong nation. This report will discuss the ways in which the collection of nations called the "middle powers" are reacting to China 's rising economic, diplomatic, and military power. It will also examine the shifting position

Realism assumes that under a balance of power, the overriding aim of all states is to maximize power and become the only hegemony in the system. States only help themselves in the anarchic international system. Therefore, China’s rise is regarded as a disconcerting threat to the U.S.’s primacy of power in the present international stage. The power shift in East Asia is creating security dilemmas; the U.S. thus demands more security to its Asian allies including Philippines, Japan and South Korea. The rapidly-rising Chinese power would inevitably challenge the current international balance of power and appear aggressively in the eyes of weaker power such as the Philippines. Therefore it seeks help to its ally, the U.S., to counterbalance the power of China. China intends to gain more resources and to transform current international order to its favor according to its national interests. The 2010 Chinese White Paper on National Defence states that: “Contradictions continue to surface between developed and developing countries and between traditional

Theories are used in many fields of science, but in no field are they more prevalent than Political Science. These theories are often used and researched upon to try and attempt to discern how states interact with one another. Offensive Realism, a new branch of realist political theory, is brought forth in John Mearsheimer’s book, The Tragedy of Great Power Politics. This theory focuses on the key aspects of realism, while adding a twist as to why war is an option. In his book, Mearsheimer explains the history of great powers, and predicts that China, the world’s current rising great power, will not gain hegemony in Asia peacefully. With the rise of China, he asserts the US will form coalitions with multiple states throughout Asia, to contain their growing power. This rise in power, and subsequent reactions by the US, are based on his theory Offensive Realism, which is used to predict China’s future actions. The rise of powers, and the reactions of other powers, is historically analyzed, beginning in the late 18th century, all the way to modern times. These analyzes each attempt to support his overall claim that China will rise through non-peaceful means, and shows significant support with historical examples. While the theory often meets an exception when the usual non-European power, Japan, is mentioned, Mearsheimer’s theory introduces a solid new aspect to the realm of Political Science, and presents enough evidence and information to be considered integral to

Snyder claims that realism failed to predict the Cold War. Given this, Mearsheimer states “China cannot rise peacefully.” Since realists describe the world as a self-help system, according to Posen, every country “must look to its own interests relative to those of others” and because “security is the preeminent issue in an anarchic world, the distribution of capabilities to attack and defend should matter.” Thus, because China’s strive for regional hegemony inevitably threatens the power dynamic of the global system, the U.S. will, according to Mearsheimer, take an offensive realist approach that will eventually lead to war. In addition, as seen in post-Cold War, economic stability greatly determines the distribution of power. Friedberg notes, that the projected “speed and magnitude of China’s growth in recent decades appears to be unprecedented” and as early as 2015, “China’s economy could overtake that of the United States.” Although the U.S. faces an unprecedented challenge to economic power, according to Ikenberry, China has signaled cooperation by “redoubling its participation in existing institutions, such as the ASEAN Regional Forum and the East Asia Summit or working with the other great powers in the region to build new ones.” Nevertheless, following the actions of the U.S. post WWII, China strategically makes “itself more predictable and approachable” to reduce “the incentives for other