By Tom Plate
LOS ANGELES ― Looked at from all the angles, China has the capacity to prove a far tougher challenger for the United States than even al-Qaida and other like-minded evildoers.
But that doesn't mean the relationship between Beijing and Washington has to be entirely problematic. Surely understanding China better will reduce misunderstandings faster.
Yes, but ― there’s one hitch with that approach. It’s the tacit assumption that China more or less understands itself. Increasingly that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Here’s why. Suddenly richer than it has been for many centuries, China now suffers from an embarrassment of options. Among them is the economic-development-first option ― maintaining a low global profile while it proceeds quietly with its extraordinary economic march.
The opposite approach might be termed the “Bruce Lee” option. Under this alternative China starts cashing in its chips to pump up its muscle and project itself in Asia (and beyond?) as the new challenger to America’s superpower-class monopolization.
These two approaches conceivably could proceed in parallel, but U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates might be forgiven for suspecting that the decision has been made in Beijing to Bruce Lee it from here on out.
Just consider what happened during his recent official visit to Beijing. It was aimed at warming up relations between the two huge military establishments, but it was exactly then that the Chinese brass decided to run a test of its new stealth super-high-technology fighter plane. The test’s timing surprised not only the top U.S. defense official in town but apparently the civilian government in Beijing as well.
But when the test made headlines worldwide, it seemed as if the leaders of the Chinese military were only too happy to make no secret of their new stealth. It’s as if they were saying who was the real boss back in Beijing.
The Chinese are not ordinarily rude, as they most certainly were on this occasion. So what was the point? Consider, then, my Bruce Lee hypothesis. In general, everyone knows, China today is feeling its "Wheaties," as we sometimes say in America.
It's flexing its muscles, throwing its newly bulked up weight around. Another way of putting this is that it is exhibiting "Bruce Lee syndrome." The late, great Lee was not simply the legendary proponent of martial arts movies and philosophy but in his time was a most prominent and applauded champion of Chinese nationalism.
Just like the glamorous James Bond lifting the British out of their emotional dumps in the 1960s, Lee in the 1970s offered his many Chinese admirers a masterful image of both assertive intelligence and effective brawn.
After centuries of invasion and exploitation and even occupation, the Chinese needed a huge dose of their Bruce Lee at least as much as the British needed their boost of Bond.
And so what you are now seeing in the new wave of Chinese assertiveness may well be the rebirth of the Bruce Lee syndrome.
Indeed, you can almost imagine the gleam in the eyes of the Chinese armed forces recently as they pushed back against the Japanese, brushed up against its Asian neighbors and puffed up their macho military plumage ― even (or especially) when the top American defense boss was in town.
To analyze and understand is not the same as to accept or endorse, however. On the movie screen, glorious and cheeky Bruce Lee was entertaining and relatively harmless. In the real world, Bruce Braggadocio can lead to scary and unwanted outcomes.
The leaders of the People's Liberation Army may be taking China on a wrong march.
If there is a corrective within China to Bruce Lee, it rests with the Communist Party, the supreme power of China, and with the top leaders in its government, as well as in the party.
But have they been cut down to size already? It didn't help their image any that the military hadn't bothered to inform China’s civilian leaders of the stealth test during Gates' visit.
The opportunity to correct this impression, if it is incorrect, comes with President Hu Jintao's official state visit to Washington on Jan. 19. Long-planned, and much anticipated in Beijing as a flattering “big-boys” confab, the summit needs to be seen as bringing the Americans and the Chinese closer together on some issues.
One place to start would be the North Korean impasse. Should joint Chinese and American efforts move the crisis toward a reduction of differences between the North and the South, a normalization of relations with the West, and the start of denuclearization in the North, that might be just the thing to halt China’s wrong march, put the Chinese admirals and generals in their place, and put reasoned diplomacy back into its proper position of celebrated prominence.
Loyola Marymount University Prof. Tom Plate is the author of “Conversations With Mahathir Mohamad,” the second in the “Giants of Asia” series, due out next month from Marshall Cavendish. He can be reached at platecolumn@gmail.com.
Originally published January 17, 2011 in the Korea Times.
LOS ANGELES ― Looked at from all the angles, China has the capacity to prove a far tougher challenger for the United States than even al-Qaida and other like-minded evildoers.
But that doesn't mean the relationship between Beijing and Washington has to be entirely problematic. Surely understanding China better will reduce misunderstandings faster.
Yes, but ― there’s one hitch with that approach. It’s the tacit assumption that China more or less understands itself. Increasingly that doesn’t seem to be the case.
Here’s why. Suddenly richer than it has been for many centuries, China now suffers from an embarrassment of options. Among them is the economic-development-first option ― maintaining a low global profile while it proceeds quietly with its extraordinary economic march.
The opposite approach might be termed the “Bruce Lee” option. Under this alternative China starts cashing in its chips to pump up its muscle and project itself in Asia (and beyond?) as the new challenger to America’s superpower-class monopolization.
These two approaches conceivably could proceed in parallel, but U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates might be forgiven for suspecting that the decision has been made in Beijing to Bruce Lee it from here on out.
Just consider what happened during his recent official visit to Beijing. It was aimed at warming up relations between the two huge military establishments, but it was exactly then that the Chinese brass decided to run a test of its new stealth super-high-technology fighter plane. The test’s timing surprised not only the top U.S. defense official in town but apparently the civilian government in Beijing as well.
But when the test made headlines worldwide, it seemed as if the leaders of the Chinese military were only too happy to make no secret of their new stealth. It’s as if they were saying who was the real boss back in Beijing.
The Chinese are not ordinarily rude, as they most certainly were on this occasion. So what was the point? Consider, then, my Bruce Lee hypothesis. In general, everyone knows, China today is feeling its "Wheaties," as we sometimes say in America.
It's flexing its muscles, throwing its newly bulked up weight around. Another way of putting this is that it is exhibiting "Bruce Lee syndrome." The late, great Lee was not simply the legendary proponent of martial arts movies and philosophy but in his time was a most prominent and applauded champion of Chinese nationalism.
Just like the glamorous James Bond lifting the British out of their emotional dumps in the 1960s, Lee in the 1970s offered his many Chinese admirers a masterful image of both assertive intelligence and effective brawn.
After centuries of invasion and exploitation and even occupation, the Chinese needed a huge dose of their Bruce Lee at least as much as the British needed their boost of Bond.
And so what you are now seeing in the new wave of Chinese assertiveness may well be the rebirth of the Bruce Lee syndrome.
Indeed, you can almost imagine the gleam in the eyes of the Chinese armed forces recently as they pushed back against the Japanese, brushed up against its Asian neighbors and puffed up their macho military plumage ― even (or especially) when the top American defense boss was in town.
To analyze and understand is not the same as to accept or endorse, however. On the movie screen, glorious and cheeky Bruce Lee was entertaining and relatively harmless. In the real world, Bruce Braggadocio can lead to scary and unwanted outcomes.
The leaders of the People's Liberation Army may be taking China on a wrong march.
If there is a corrective within China to Bruce Lee, it rests with the Communist Party, the supreme power of China, and with the top leaders in its government, as well as in the party.
But have they been cut down to size already? It didn't help their image any that the military hadn't bothered to inform China’s civilian leaders of the stealth test during Gates' visit.
The opportunity to correct this impression, if it is incorrect, comes with President Hu Jintao's official state visit to Washington on Jan. 19. Long-planned, and much anticipated in Beijing as a flattering “big-boys” confab, the summit needs to be seen as bringing the Americans and the Chinese closer together on some issues.
One place to start would be the North Korean impasse. Should joint Chinese and American efforts move the crisis toward a reduction of differences between the North and the South, a normalization of relations with the West, and the start of denuclearization in the North, that might be just the thing to halt China’s wrong march, put the Chinese admirals and generals in their place, and put reasoned diplomacy back into its proper position of celebrated prominence.
Loyola Marymount University Prof. Tom Plate is the author of “Conversations With Mahathir Mohamad,” the second in the “Giants of Asia” series, due out next month from Marshall Cavendish. He can be reached at platecolumn@gmail.com.
Originally published January 17, 2011 in the Korea Times.
No comments:
Post a Comment