The Shape of Asia’s New Cold War

Jun 10, 2020 Yoon Young-kwan

China's decision to demolish the "one country, two systems" arrangement in Hong Kong appears to be a fait accompli, and in fact seems to have been preordained. Viewed in a broader context, the move represents a major salvo in a new cold war that is already playing out across three critical dimensions.

SEOUL – In retrospect, the decision by the Communist Party of China (CPC) to impose a new security law on Hong Kong seems to have been preordained. Historically, rising powers always try to expand their spheres of geopolitical influence once they pass a certain stage of economic development. It was only a matter of time before China would do away with the “one country, two systems” arrangement and impose its laws and norms on Hong Kong – a territory that it considers integral to the motherland.

From China’s perspective, America’s decadence and decline over the last 12 years – from the 2008 financial crisis to Donald Trump’s presidency – have given it an open invitation to accelerate its strategic expansion. Though Chinese President Xi Jinping has long assured the world that the Pacific Ocean is big enough to accommodate both China and the United States, his actual policies have often suggested otherwise. In addition to militarizing the South China Sea, his signature Belt and Road Initiative aims to make China the nodal point for the entire Eurasian landmass.

Now that Xi has decided to accept nothing less than Hong Kong’s full subservience, he will likely also challenge the status quo with respect to Taiwan, trusting that an isolationist, distracted Trump administration will do nothing. But the US has taken note of Xi’s aggressiveness. After two decades of hoping that China would become a responsible stakeholder in the world economy, US policymakers have finally decided that this will not happen. Since the CPC’s March 2018 decision to abolish presidential term limits, the US foreign-policy establishment has abandoned any expectation of normative convergence between Xi’s China and the West.

We hope you're enjoying Project Syndicate.

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Already have an account? Log in

Support High-Quality Commentary

US President-elect Joe Biden may have promised a “return to normalcy,” but the truth is that there is no going back. The world is changing in fundamental ways, and the actions the world takes in the next few years will be critical to lay the groundwork for a sustainable, secure, and prosperous future.

For more than 25 years, Project Syndicate has been guided by a simple credo: All people deserve access to a broad range of views by the world’s foremost leaders and thinkers on the issues, events, and forces shaping their lives. At a time of unprecedented uncertainty, that mission is more important than ever – and we remain committed to fulfilling it.

But there is no doubt that we, like so many other media organizations nowadays, are under growing strain. If you are in a position to support us, please subscribe now.

As a subscriber, you will enjoy unlimited access to our On Point suite of long reads and book reviews, Say More contributor interviews, The Year Ahead magazine, the full PS archive, and much more. You will also directly support our mission of delivering the highest-quality commentary on the world's most pressing issues to as wide an audience as possible.

By helping us to build a truly open world of ideas, every PS subscriber makes a real difference. Thank you.

Subscribe Now

new comment has been posted. new comments have been posted.

0 Comments on this paragraph, 8 in all 8 Comments on this article

xmakrak06 Jun 18, 2020

>But democratic principles – such as a respect for human rights, civil liberties, and the rule of law – are universal values that still attract broad-based support among Asians, particularly when compared to authoritarianism.

I wonder if the Author knows what is going on right now on Greek islands, on the mexico borders, in certain islands that Australia is concentrating people. I wonder if he is aware of the human rights of black people in USA or how the water crisis in South Africa is going on nowadays. What respect on human rights is he talking about? At least China got rid of US and raised 300m people from poverty at the same time the West put 300m in poverty.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
David Lentz Jun 14, 2020

Rule of law: who’s law
Liberal democracy: obviously recent events show its a fraud
China is authoritarian and America is not
Cannot stop laughing
Disagree with America and you get sanctioned
American law is selectively applied depending on race etc
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Leto Atreides Jun 14, 2020

One fundamental difference between China and US is China's lack of ideology. If one follows Chinese political scientists and commentators, one will see that there is no Chinese ideological equivalent of the ideology of liberal democracy that the West promotes. Instead, the so-called China model challenges the western ideology, but does not provide an alternative because they believe the China model is only suitable for China and cannot be replicated elsewhere. In some sense, this is the Chinese exceptionalism. The lesson they want to offer to other countries to counter western ideology is to be pragmatic instead of being brain-washed by ideologies. Every country has its own culture, own background, own problems, and it is foolish to believe that the same universal model of governance and values can just be transplanted everywhere and expected to flourish. The fact that China has succeeded by defying western expectations of how it should be like is the most valuable lesson for other developing countries, that they need to find their own path of development not constrained by dogmas and ideologies from the west.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
F Ahmed Jun 12, 2020

Post US-USSR cold war, international peace and security have fallen well short of the euphoria that accompanied it. There have been more active conflicts with vast misery and forced human displacement. The edifice of human rights and international law has taken a battering, and it is used more for big-powers' geo-political maneuvering than anything else. Taking the golden guidance from capitalism, competition serves consumers best. The models of US and allies or China and allies alone will serve the world negatively.
The more power centers there are with competition, the better it will be for the world. The ultimate panacea, however, has to be two fold:
1- Fundamental reform of the non-credible UN talking shop with devising a truly democratic, equitable and human rights based global governance system (very tall order).
2- All countries, big and small, acting responsibly and adhering to human rights and norms of civilized behavior with effective delivery to their citizenry (very tall order).
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
j. von Hettlingen Jun 10, 2020

Yoon Young-kwan says, with China’s rise as a global economic powerhouse a decade ago, it is expected that Beijing wants to expand its sphere of geopolitical influence once it passes “a certain stage of economic development.” The 2008 financial crisis had put the US on a path of decline. While Obama managed to slow its pace, Trump’s decadent administration is accelerating it, inviting Beijing to fully embrace its strategic expansion and Xi to realise his “Chinese dream.”
The timing could not have been more opportune: Beijing has taken advantage of the current global pandemic to flex its muscles, when the world is preoccupied with deaths and economic downturn. It has reasserted control over Hong Kong with the recent passage of the new security law. Seeking to cement its maritime claims in the South China Sea, it has bolstered its foothold in the fortified islands there. Recently Beijing has provoked India and Taiwan by violating their territorial integrity.
According to the author, Trump, as an “isolationist” obsessed with his “American First” policy, he is too worried about his re-election in November to intervene, if Beijing decides to bring Taiwan back into its fold. “But the US has taken note of Xi’s aggressiveness. After two decades of hoping,” China had not become “a responsible stakeholder in the world economy.” In fact it has turned authoritarian since Xi took office in 2012.
Since Xi was made president for life in March 2018, “the US foreign-policy establishment has abandoned any expectation of normative convergence between Xi’s China and the West.” Trump’s trade war risks prolonging the conflict with Beijing, posing a threat to the global economy. Grappling with a health crisis, and a stalling economy, he has escalated tensions by blaming China for covering up the outbreak of Covid-19, that had enabled the virus to spread across the globe. “Thus, a strategic consensus has emerged across Asia that the region will be the central “battlefield” in a new cold war that has already begun.”
The author urges Asian leaders – and the rest of the world – to “focus on three different but interrelated domains of the Sino-American rivalry: politico-military, economic, and ideological” in order to make sense of the “nature” of the upcoming conflict.
At the “politico-military” level, China seeks to drive the US out of Asia, or at least to undermine its "security commitments” in South Korea, Japan, the Philippines, and the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). If Beijing overreached itself, it could “impel” these countries “to form a new anti-China coalition” with Washington. If it happened, a peaceful coexistence with the US would be very difficult. “Asia’s new cold war would be at risk of degenerating into an unintended hot war.”
The author argues that “any confrontation at the politico-military level is bound to accelerate a decoupling process, transforming the region’s positive-sum economy into a negative-sum one.” While China presents both geopolitical challenges and potential economic benefits to the countries in the region – many have signed up to Beijing’s “Belt and Road Initiative – to improve their infrasstructure, they continue to rely on the US for their security.
Seeing a “full-fledged break” from China as “especially costly, complicated, and dangerous,” Asian leaders might “resist US efforts to hasten a comprehensive decoupling, in favor of a more limited approach that targets sensitive security-related and high-tech industries.” Given Trump’s mercurial personality, the transactional nature of his foreign policy, and the likelihood of his electoral defeat in November, people across Asia adopt the “wait-and-see” approach, before they want to squander more of their “goodwill toward America” after three years of outrage and frustration.
If Xi Jinping has his way, “the politico-military dimension is the new cold war’s determining factor, and economics the dependent factor, the ideological confrontation will play a reinforcing role.” He would seek to promote China’s “authoritarian capitalism” as a “superior” alternative to liberal democracy. The author fears China would push its model “as aggressively as the Soviet Union once did,” and the “new cold war will have all the ingredients – and all the myriad tensions – of the original Cold War.”
However this will trigger a pushback against China’s assertiveness, prompting democratic countries to unite against it. Despite mismanagement of the current crisis in the UK and the US, people across the West still cherish liberal democracy. Principles – such as a respect for human rights, civil liberties, and the rule of law – “are universal values that still attract broad-based support among Asians,” especially vis-à-vis authoritarianism.
China is an an extractive state that does not allow individuals to “realize their full potential.” It aspires to overtake the US as the world’s “most advanced” economy, but the country’s “structural limitation” stands in its way.
Asian leaders need to be prudent and avoid walking on the thin ice. As narcissists teem with hubris, both Trump nor Xi are incapable of showing “humility.” Like Icarus, who forgot his father's warning, they would fly too high and too close to the sun. The intense heat would melt the wax on their wings, plunging them into the sea and drown them, just like Icarus.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.
Godfree Roberts Jun 10, 2020

"the decision by the Communist Party of China (CPC) to impose a new security law on Hong Kong seems to have been preordained. "

Yes, it was preordained by both the Constitution of China, the Basic Law, and commonsense, as Deng Xiaoping explained in 1984: "We have discussed the policy of "one country, two systems" more than once. It has been adopted by the National People's Congress. Some people are worried that it might change. I say it will not. The crux of the matter, the decisive factor, is whether the policy is correct. If it is not, it will change; otherwise it won't.

"Some requirements or qualifications should be established with regard to the administration of Hong Kong affairs by the people of Hong Kong. It must be required that patriots form the main body of administrators, that is, of the future government of the Hong Kong special region. Of course it should include other Chinese, too, as well as foreigners invited to serve as advisers. What is a patriot? A patriot is one who respects the Chinese nation, sincerely supports the motherland's resumption of sovereignty over Hong Kong and wishes not to impair Hong Kong's prosperity and stability. Those who meet these requirements are patriots, whether they believe in capitalism or feudalism or even slavery. We don't demand that they be in favor of China's socialist system; we only ask them to love the motherland and Hong Kong."

Source: Deng Xiaoping on "one country, two systems"http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2004-02/19/content_307590.htm
- lt lee Jun 11, 2020
  
  Well said.
  
  It is odd that many who choose to comment on the security law passed by the Hong Kong Legislators a few days ago seem to have little knowledge about Hong Kong and the Basic Law (Hong Kong's constitution.)
  
  The Security Law is indeed preordained per the Basic Law:
  
  "Article 23
  The Hong Kong Special Administrative Region shall enact laws on its own to prohibit any act of treason, secession, sedition, subversion against the Central People's Government, or theft of state secrets, to prohibit foreign political organizations or bodies from conducting political activities in the Region, and to prohibit political organizations or bodies of the Region from establishing ties with foreign political organizations or bodies. "
  
  https://www.basiclaw.gov.hk/en/basiclawtext/chapter_2.html
  A new reply to this comment has been posted.
A new reply to this comment has been posted.

https://prosyn.org/MPCCPlU

Cookies and Privacy

The Shape of Asia’s New Cold War

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

New Comment

Email this piece to a friend

Contact us

Log in/Register

Cookies and Privacy

The Shape of Asia’s New Cold War

To continue reading, subscribe now.

Support High-Quality Commentary

Edit Newsletter Preferences

Set up Notification