ABSTRACT
In Chapter 3, Thomas Meyer investigates some fundamental civilizational differences among China, the USA, Russia, and Europe that must be kept in mind when assessing cross-national affairs. On that basis, he criticizes key elements of the EU’s most recent strategic paper on EU–China relations, which disturbingly depicts China as “a systemic rival promoting alternative models of governance.” Such language evokes fears of a hostile, zero-sum game logic that directly contradicts both European and Chinese foreign policy objectives. It echoes the questionable ideology that our world is defined by confrontation between democracies and autocracies, with the implicit corollary that the latter should undergo “regime change.” However, the term “rival” does not fit the reality of Chinese foreign policy and only nourishes mutual misunderstanding. Chinese officials repeatedly have insisted that Beijing—far from seeking to replace Washington as the hegemon of a revamped world order—aspires to be a simple peer among leading nations, standing side by side with other powers. President Xi Jinping has stressed that his country aims to achieve a truly “rules-based but more equal world order with the UNO as its core.” Thus, the guidelines for future relations between the EU and China should feature trust-building dialogue and cooperation as a means to update the political consensus about global rules.
Rounding out the discussion in Part 1, Andrew Gamble emphasizes the dissimilarities between the post-WWII international system, including the original Cold War, and our current situation. Unlike the state of affairs that prevailed earlier, there is now a high degree of integration and interdependence between China and the West. Europe has been ambivalent about following the USA’s lead on China because of its desire to maintain trade links with the People’s Republic. The imperatives of security and of trade pull in different directions, and a cold war with China clearly would usher in an era of protectionism. Although Europeans are divided over whether China should be viewed as a partner, a competitor, or a rival, many remain reluctant to capitulate to the logic of a new cold war. There is good reason to believe that we can forestall that outcome by promoting greater engagement and mutual understanding.
