A strong, proud China is right to be assertive in pursuing its national interests

The choice of the word ‘assertive’ by Western observers commenting on China is driven mostly by managing the perceptions and reaction of domestic audiences, but China is capable of so much more than that one word can convey

Frank S. Hong

Published: 10:15am, 15 Nov 2020

Why you can trust SCMP

If you had to choose one word to describe China, what would it be? Adding “communist” or “red” before “China” has become so hackneyed that only someone as stodgy as Peter Navarro, Donald Trump’s trade adviser, still gets a kick out of uttering the words on live television.

The word “authoritarian” is a safe bet. Still, as America suffers from excessive dogma on both the religious and secular fronts, this otherwise loaded concept no longer packs a moral punch.

China has so far avoided the word “rogue”. However, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo found it convenient to use China allegedly falling short of being a “normal country” in pre-launching his 2024 presidential run under the disguise of a foreign policy speech delivered at the Nixon Library.

Little attention is paid to the word “assertive”, which seems to be the preferred adjective preceding “China”. Characterising China as “increasingly assertive” is the least controversial, if not a solid consensus in American discourse on China. “Assertive” sounds moderate, yet it isn’t.

It does stumble on some truth in that today’s China projects its influence beyond its borders. From uninterrupted flows of capital and goods even at the height of the pandemic to millions of tourists and students abroad, not to mention fortifying reefs in the South China Sea, the world feels China’s weight on a daily basis.

Chinese structures on the man-made Subi Reef in the Spratly island chain are seen from Thitu Island in the South China Sea on April 21, 2017. Photo: AP

China has clearly overshot the goal of “a responsible stakeholder” set by Robert Zoellick, as it is redefining the stakes for the world. It shows it is capable of producing 8 million college graduates a year; a formerly closed economy can become a leading exporter within four decades; the children of factory workers and owners who export low-cost socks and toys can become leaders in 5G and artificial intelligence.

This is so much more than “assertive” can convey. Even so, many otherwise compassionate and insightful opinion leaders in America suspend their thinking when it comes to China. They seek comfort in what Herbert Marcuse called “language that designates a priori the enemy as evil in his entirety and in all his actions and intentions”.

The choice of the word “assertive” is driven mostly by managing the perceptions and reaction of domestic audiences in the West. It sets the tone to allow China-bashing rhetoric to follow, but the more important and subtle objective is to have a soothing effect.

01:56

Diaoyu-Senkaku islands spat deepens as Japan warns China over coastguard ships in East China Sea

Through a linguistic sleight of hand, the contrast between China’s sustained build-up and the relentless squandering of resources and destruction by the United States over the past four decades is framed as a behavioural contest on the world stage.

The difference between the two approaches matters. Senator Richard Russell, who served as chairman of the Senate Armed Service Committee from 1951 to 1969, once said: “There is something about preparing for destruction that causes men to be more careless in spending money than they would be if they were building for constructive purposes.

“Why that is, I do not know; but I have observed, over a period of almost 30 years in the Senate, that there is something about buying arms with which to kill, to destroy, to wipe out cities, and to obliterate great transportation systems which causes men not to reckon the dollar cost as closely as they do when they think about proper housing and the care of the health of human beings.”

Bombing China may not be an option today, but punitive sanctions and reckless disruptions of global supply chains can be just as damaging. When it comes to destructive moves, whether at home or abroad, prudence and wisdom are as absent as Russell observed nearly 60 years ago.

In a recently proposed amendment to the national defence law, developmental interests were added to the list of reasons for defence mobilisation. China’s new export control law, which takes effect on December 1, allows reciprocal measures against any country or region that abuses export-control measures and threatens China’s national security and interests.

China, a nation with great aspirations, is willing and able to restrict its exports for defence purposes, showing the world it can be assertive in a way never seen before.

Frank S. Hong is the founder of www.cookding.org, an independent think tank based in Shanghai

Post