Words are often used as weapons, and semantics employed to represent the reality in an ideologically charged way. It is not surprising that nowadays the US is struggling to find the right words to describe its relationship with China, words that allow to depict the US as a good and benign power, and China as a danger, while at the same time denying the very fact that America sees China as a threat.
The following example is one of the most interesting. Robert Manning wrote an article on East Asian Forum, arguing that the US is not containing China; it is 'counterbalancing' China. What is the difference between the two terms?
According to Manning, "containment was an effort to isolate Moscow economically; undermine its ideology; and contain its military power with a robust US nuclear arsenal, alliances such as NATO to its West and Japan to its East, and an integrated global trade and financial system. Containment meant minimal social or economic interaction with Russians."
'Counterbalancing', on the other hand, means "mobilising resources and partners to offset a perceived challenge to the existing strategic balance. The danger is that this can create a dynamic known as a ‘security dilemma’ in international relations theory. One state increasing its military strength because it feels vulnerable may produce an unintended reaction in another state which feels threatened, leading to a spiral of increased tensions and conflict."
The two terms indeed describe a very different pattern. Counterbalancing refers to the perceived emergence of a new power that challenges the prominence of a new one. Counterbalancing is, in some respects, more subtle, and even more dangerous than containment. While containment is based on a declared rivalry, counterbalancing is more ambiguous; it is a strategy that derives from the desire of a hegemonic power to prevent another country from reaching the same level of economic, military and political strength on the world stage. Yet this attitude is deeply unjust.
World hegemony is based on hierarchy. Some countries count less than others. The US has created a hierarchical post-war order with itself at the top. While on paper the US was promoting peace and equality among nations, it concentrated power in its own hands because it believed in its own moral superiority, it believed that only the US could use its power wisely. Many Americans seem to be unaware of this self-contradiction. In some ways the rivalry between the US and China resembles that between Great Britain and Germany before World War I. Great Britain was the biggest colonial power, but it denied Germany the right to become a colonial power. The Germans perceived this attitude as unfair - as long as no one has colonies, all can be equal, but if one has more colonies and power than anyone else, there can be no equality.
World hegemony is based on hierarchy. Some countries count less than others. The US has created a hierarchical post-war order with itself at the top. While on paper the US was promoting peace and equality among nations, it concentrated power in its own hands because it believed in its own moral superiority, it believed that only the US could use its power wisely. Many Americans seem to be unaware of this self-contradiction. In some ways the rivalry between the US and China resembles that between Great Britain and Germany before World War I. Great Britain was the biggest colonial power, but it denied Germany the right to become a colonial power. The Germans perceived this attitude as unfair - as long as no one has colonies, all can be equal, but if one has more colonies and power than anyone else, there can be no equality.
Feng Menglong: The Oil Vendor and the Queen of Flowers 賣油郎獨占花魁 (English and Chinese Edition) (Classics of Chinese Literature)
No comments:
Post a Comment