... then it must well be so. Maybe.
In yesterday's Guardian, Ash declares 2 April 2009 as the day on which, "through the catalysis of the global economic crisis, China definitively emerged as a 21st-century world power." This declaration the seemingly inevitable consequence of China's enormous clout at the G20 summit (even the French are now cozying up to China!). The China Post likewise, and not surprisingly, proclaimed the summit as "China's big break" and quite possibly the turning point of the global economy.
Fine. If China is now the new, official world power the subsequent question becomes that of what kind of power will China be? In an attempt to answer this question, Ash poses what he calls the "Chinese question of questions":
can you continue to combine command politics with market economics? Or, to frame it more positively: can you achieve a controlled, step-by-step evolution of this political system into one that is more responsive, transparent, accountable and therefore durable?
Ash then optimistically assumes that China will be able to remedy its domestic challenges, command politics and all, and will continue to rise to that coveted #1 spot. Yet he never quite arrives at a response identifying the type of power China might become, likely because he's not asking the appropriate questions. John Pomfret does a brilliant job dissecting precisely this point:
But what if he's asked the wrong question? What if the burning question for China is, for example, demographics? It's the fastest aging society in the world. It will indeed grow old before it gets rich. Or what if the question is environmental? I don't need to go into details here, you know how bad it is. Or social? China's crime problem is serious and getting worse. There's a nationwide shortage of trust. Or health-related? AIDS continues to grow; there's avian flu. Or economic? Yes, China has done miraculously so far. But exports are down significantly. Can they weather this Western-induced crisis?There is a triumphalism coming from Beijing that Garton Ash's piece notes. The recent attack on the dollar; the obnoxious musings of Vice President and Anointed Successor Xi Junping while he was in Mexico. Some of the bluster is justified. But some of it also masks a deep insecurity about what's next for China. We need to remember that what we often think are the big questions for that great country aren't the right ones at all.
As China continues its inevitable rise, it is crucial for Western scholars to think outside the box in analyses of this growing world power. The oft employed Western paradigm of economy+military+political system only takes us so far in understanding the what, and why and how when it comes to China. There is, in other words, no clear formulaic approach to this emerging economy. So to that end, Timothy Garton Ash may be right. Or not.