By Yu Sui
When we talk about major power relations these days, we're
talking not just about ties between major countries but major
country alliances, such as the European Union. Looking back at the
unstable and constantly readjusted major power relations since the
end of the Cold War, we can see phenomena with broad
implications.
First, all major powers have more or less accepted that peace
and development are the main concerns of our times. They have, with
almost no exception, adopted the strategy of building
self-confidence internally and seeking coexistence while competing
with others externally.
Internally, the major powers have made economic development
their priority and are looking to science and technology to improve
people's living standards as well as increasing national
strength.
Internationally, they have been trying to improve their own
standing so as to profit as best they can in the name of creating
favorable external conditions for national development. Because of
their extraordinary status, major powers' internal affairs more
often than not affect the outside world.
Examples of this can be found in such domestic developments as
the reelections of Russian President Vladimir Putin and US
President George W. Bush in 2004, the EU Constitution debacle in
French and Dutch referendums in 2005, and the 2006 triumph of the
Democrats in US mid-term elections.
Second, disputes between major powers will affect the rest of
the world negatively, while their cooperation tends to benefit
international affairs. For instance, the ongoing Iraq War and the
decades-long conflict between the Israelis and the Palestinians
have profound major-power influences.
By the same token, the Korea Peninsula nuclear crisis could have
developed into a global disaster had there not been all-out
cooperation among major powers to contain it.
Third, competition among major powers over markets, natural
resources, science and technology and human resources is escalating
daily as the global market expands.
At the same time, the willingness to cooperate among nations is
also gaining momentum as it is necessary for security and
development, which require a balance of economic interests
first.
As a result of adjustment and fine-tuning, a flurry of strategic
cooperation partnerships, constructive cooperation partnerships,
comprehensive partnerships and friendly cooperation partnerships
have emerged.
A new product of the post-Cold War era, the strategic
partnership without an alliance has become a transitional
phenomenon on the way to building a harmonious world as well as a
new international political and economic order.
Fourth, the possibility for major powers to engage in positive
rather than negative interaction is growing. The late Chinese
leader Deng Xiaoping said during his meeting with then US President
Richard Nixon that "a country should base its assessment of its
relations with another country primarily on its own strategic
interests. It should keep in mind its long-term strategic interests
and respect those of the other side as well."
?
Deng's words laid the theoretical basis for positive interaction.
By the look of it, so-called positive interaction should be a new
type of relationship characterized by mutual benefit.
Positive interaction means the healthy nature of bilateral ties
is seen in the fact that no third party is targeted and that at no
time does a triangular relationship involve any two parties ganging
up against the third.
Fifth, we can conclude that positive interaction has its own law
of functioning, moving from beginning to process to fruition.
At the beginning, it is absolutely imperative that a country
secure its own national interests while respecting those of the
other side.
During the process stage, there will be competition alongside
cooperation and conflicts alongside compromises. Cooperation must
be based on sincerity and trust while compromise should be
appropriate and disputes should never be allowed to grow into
confrontation.
?
Fruition has to be win-win.
Now, what exactly do major power relationships look like in
today's world? We might as well take China's relations with other
major powers as an example.
First, China-US relations are characterized by ups and downs.
The relationship has been able to develop because both sides need
it for their own interests.
The reason that there have been so many twists and turns is that
China follows the basic policy of enhancing confidence, reducing
troubles, increasing cooperation and avoiding confrontation with
the United States, in sharp contrast to the US principle of contact
plus containment.
The main source of trouble has been the United States. Whether
Sino-US relations will be able to maintain stability in the future
depends on how the US proceeds.
The China-US relationship is like a coin with cooperation on one
side and competition on the other. It is up to Washington to decide
which side of the coin it wants up. When Bush became president, he
initially flipped the coin to turn the partnership side down,
making China a competitor of the US. Now he appears to be turning
that side up again.
Despite such labels as "stake holder" and "responsible major
power", which the United States has applied to China, the US will
always try to play China for its own needs.
?
Second, China-Russia relations have more positive than negative
factors.
This is a relatively harmonious relationship with unique
characteristics. The two countries are close without either side
having to rely on the other. They protect their own dignity with no
intention to subvert the other; they manage to resolve their
conflicts of interest through negotiations on an equal footing;
both sides handle international affairs without resorting to double
standards; and they are both keen on developing bilateral ties with
the US the only superpower in the world today while opposing
unilateralism.
That said, China and Russia need to further build mutual
confidence, or there will be more wrangling over such issues as the
so-called Chinese immigrants in Russia, energy export and arms
sales to China.
Third, China-Japan relations suffer from too many nagging
issues.
Economic ties between the two countries continue to grow and
serve the interests of both sides. The two nations have managed to
reduce some of the tensions straining their political relations,
but relations remain weak and vulnerable.
Actions directly threatening Sino-Japanese ties include some
Japanese politicians' no-holds-barred attempts to whitewash its
atrocious war history, frequently provoking territorial disputes,
and even poking its nose into the sensitive Taiwan question.
The core issue here is Tokyo's obsession with major political
power status. Japan is determined to achieve this status by any
means, such as ganging up with the United States to strengthen the
containment of China.
It is unlikely that the ongoing issues over Japan's history of
aggression will disappear. As long as these issues remain, it will
be impossible for the two neighbors to improve bilateral ties.
Fourth, China-EU relations have been developing steadily.
However, otherwise harmonious relations have been damaged
regularly by some jarring notes, such as the EU refusal to allow
arms sales to China, issues of human rights, and tariffs on Chinese
imports.
Fifth, China and India find their similarities useful.
Sino-India relations are developing toward a mutually beneficial
future. The two countries share the fact that both are ancient
civilizations with huge populations. They are comparable in terms
of development, which has led them to pursue similar goals.
?
Due to their different paths they have chosen to reach their goals
and different pace of progress, they are not comparable in other
respects. For these two nations the desirable guideline for
bilateral ties is to be friendly neighbors, develop together, seek
common ground without denying differences and forgo mutual
suspicion and jealousy.
Other major-power ties affecting China include the unpredictable
US-Russia relations (manic and illusive), the much-hyped US-Japan
relations (taking advantage of each other with ulterior motives),
and the treacherous US-EU relations (the odd couple arm-wrestling
under the dinner table).
The author is a researcher with Beijing-based Research
Center of the Contemporary World.
(China Daily March 14, 2007)
