The war in Ukraine has made crystal clear one thing: the world order is changing. Apart from being an unjustified aggression against a sovereign country, the military operation of Russia is also a concrete representation of the international system going through a redefinition of its power relations. Despite Putin’s Russia being the aggressor, the United States seems to be much more concerned about Xi Jinping’s China. Since the beginning of the invasion, one year ago, the US-China relationship has dramatically deteriorated, leading to an increasingly explicit confrontation between the two superpowers.
The alignment of China and Russia, that followed the Russian invasion of Ukraine and that has been strongly reaffirmed by Putin and Xi meeting in Moscow, is a turning point for the equilibrium of the international system; it consolidates a bipolar system, with the two most powerful nations of the world – the US and China – presenting and supporting two very different understanding of the world. It does not seem that these two approaches can coexist peacefully anymore, rather they appear to be headed to clash. The fact that China and the US, especially the former, confront each other explicitly, is a new feature. During the two Chinese legislative sessions held in Beijing, President Xi clearly accused Washington of trying to isolate his country and hold back its development.
Washington and Beijing, in the post-Mao period, have been able not only to coexist but also to cooperate and build fruitful economic ties. This has been possible only because China did not present itself as a system challenger, and so as a threat to the US-centric system. Since the advent of Xi Jinping, the Asian Dragon has gone through a radical shift in its attitude, becoming increasingly assertive and so, as a consequence, challenging the American world leadership.
“Chinese leaders are in essence realists. Their making of Chinese foreign policy often starts from a careful assessment of China’s relative power in the world” said Suisheng Zhao, Director of the Center for China-US Cooperation at Josef Korbel School of International Studies. From the point of view of the professor, China abandoning its “low profile” approach – that has been preferred in the post-Mao period – is related to its degree of relative power in the world. The increasing economic power of the PRC has increased the political leverage of China, allowing it to engage in a broad modernization and expansion of its military force, providing fuel to the already growing Chinese relative power.
The self-awareness of the country’s national power and international leverage has made Beijing less prone to approach the West with the high level of caution that had long characterized the Asian Dragon approach. In practical terms, this new level of self-confidence is reflected in the country assuming a more assertive approach concerning the promotion and the respect of China’s core interests. With the advent of Xi Jinping as the new leader of the Communist Party in 2012, the respect and the promotion of those interests became as important as the commitment of China to the “peaceful rise”. Even if the new leader stressed its firm commitment to the “peaceful development” approach embraced by the previous leaders, recently, many scholars talked about Chinese “wolf warrior diplomacy”, to stress the confrontational and combative approach adopted. The result of this process of transition has been a new superpower willing to challenge the status quo.
For this purpose, China seems to be ready to undertake a role of global leadership and international responsibility. The role played by China as a mediator between Iran and Saudi Arabia is a clear example of it. On March 6, 2023, representatives from Iran and Saudi Arabia met in Beijing for discussions brokered by China. Four days later, Riyadh and Tehran announced that they had decided to normalize relations. For Beijing, the announcement was a great leap forward in its rivalry with Washington, showing that China can play a positive leadership role as a great power in the 21st century.
The Chinese-brokered deal between Iran and Saudi Arabia unveils a broader picture: the United States might still be the most powerful actor, the dollar might still represent the largest share of the international currency reserves and the US might still have the most modern and technologically advanced army but China is becoming the country that the developing world look up to. The close relationship that Beijing is building with the developing world could be its greatest strength. America’s alliance system, in contrast, dates back to the postwar world. It is rooted in the past. It is composed essentially of a bunch of declining developed countries, mainly European, plus Japan, Canada, and Australia. Compared with China, the US has little resonance in the developing world. This is an enormous strategic weakness.
According to a forecast by the United Nations Population Division, in 2100 eight people out of ten will live in Asia and Africa. This trend will surely have deep implications for the international system and the status quo. In a world where developed countries face increasingly tough demographic conditions, their relevance in the global economy is projected to decrease. According to Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research, in 2075, five out of six world’s largest economies will be developing countries. This is an incredibly relevant issue for understanding the future trajectory of the world: the rise of the developing world will shape the international order. Even though currently the world is more oriented towards a bipolar system, it is creating space for developing countries to increase their influence. Both the US and China need the support of the developing world to deliver their vision of the world; this provides the global south with political leverage to gain more decisional power and to sustain their interests. The result is a projection toward a multipolar future, which is something more aligned with China’s goals. China is attracted by the fact that many of the Asian and African countries that make up the global south, are not democracies and so do not share Western-American values.
Beijing is offering a partnership without conditionalities with the consequence of attracting all those countries willing to achieve their own way of development, without adhering to Western values, such as respect for human rights and democracy. This approach is consistent with the importance attached by the Chinese model to self-determination and adherence to the non-interference principle of Chinese foreign policy. Beijing, since the conference of Bandung in 1955, has committed to abstain from intervention or interference in the domestic affairs of other countries. The pragmatic approach developed by China is focused on creating a win-win partnership regardless of the internal dynamic of its partners. This decision is, first of all, a self-interest choice that reflects its desire to maintain full territorial sovereignty and avoid any external pressure. The fact that China has such a deep interest in cultivating its relationship with the developing world is mainly driven by domestic needs. The increasing level of cooperation between China and the global south, especially Africa, is helping China to gain access to crucial raw material sources, internationalize its standards and increase its influence.
The global south, represented by all those countries of Asia, Africa and also Latin America is gaining increasing relevance in the global order and rebalancing the power around the world. Within the spectrum of competition between China and the US, this feature is crucial. Gaining the trust and the support of the global south is becoming, and will increasingly be, a determinant factor for being the dominant superpower. The US today is still the major power, but China is becoming more and more a threat to American dominance; in this period of transition, if the US wants to remain the top superpower they must pay more attention to regain the trust of the developing world. Relative to this, China seems to have a concrete advantage.
[Photo by Kremlin.ru, via Wikimedia Commons]
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author.
Gabriele Manca works in the editorial board of ISPI, the Italian Institute for International Political Studies. He wrote articles for different Italian and foreign media, such as Eastwest, The Diplomat and The Geopolitics. He has a bachelor’s degree in International Relations and a master’s degree in International Politics and Economics.
